News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3800 on: August 11, 2009, 03:02:02 PM »
Remember back in late 2008 I posted the following article from the April 10, 1912 edition of the Irish Independent:

@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3801 on: August 11, 2009, 03:45:28 PM »
Niall/Jeff
I'm confused. Wilson was a not a member of the NGLA. It is well documented the original version of Merion had features and holes based on famous models overseas. Why does it matter what the author of the article thought?

Tom

Now you've got me confused. You say that NGLA was the most eagerly anticipated course in the world, presumably for the very reason of its use of replica holes. Yet Bulger writes that THE course using replica holes was the one that Wilson was a member of ie. Merion. Theres an inconsistency there that I was trying to highlight. My point being, just don't read too much into some of the comment in this article.

Mike

Good to read your chat if only by proxy. I can't imagine that Wilson would come all the way to the UK and pass up the chance to take as much in as possible.

Niall 

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3802 on: August 11, 2009, 04:08:23 PM »
My comment about the replicas at Merion being "failures" was because the Alps was abandoned, the Eden is apparently debateable as ever existing and the Redan only fits into the Redan category if every hole with a large front corner bunker does as well.

I can's speak to the quality of the original Alps, but if it were of the highest quality I think they may have found a way to preserve it.

I believe David and Mike C debated the current 15th green being an Eden...is this correct? Why is it not universally accepted as such?

The current third is a great par 3 and very challenging. It does not offer the opportunity to run the ball onto the green. It does not slope from back to front. It does not slope in a manner that feeds balls around the bunker. Like I said, if it was intended ot be a Redan it was a faliure.

I have no problem with loose interpretations of any of these classifications just so long as there is some definition. Whichever definition is used to fit #3 into the Redan class will also include a tremendous number of holes never before mentioned in the same sentence as the term.

It speaks volumes to me that these template attempts came up short. It seems the likely result of spending an evening hearing about the type of holes thought to be ideal (without really knowing from experience why they were) and then trying to find somewhere for them.

I have never much understood art, or music for that matter, any more than what I like to listen to or look at...I don't know what goes into it...what would be the result of a leading musician tutoring me for an evening and then playing his music for me the next day before sending me off to create my own album?

Peter Pallotta

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3803 on: August 11, 2009, 04:30:57 PM »
"...What would be the result of a leading musician tutoring me for an evening and then playing his music for me the next day before sending me off to create my own album?"

In today's world, JES, probably a #1 hit and a best selling album...

Sorry. Back to regularly scheduled programming

Peter

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3804 on: August 11, 2009, 04:32:07 PM »
Niall
I don't follow your logic. Please explain.

john_stiles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3805 on: August 11, 2009, 04:32:40 PM »
JS,

If you were not one of the best musicians in Philadelphia,  the tutoring would not go very far in helping you create your own album.


To the hanger-ons,

I thought the 10th and the 12th green were relocated so that play would not be across ever increasing traffic on Ardmore.

Lesley described the 13th,  a par 3 below the clubhouse,  as the 'extra drink' hole which surely would have pleased Macdonald.

Did Macdonald or Whigham ever play the new Merion East,  or comment on the course after completion ?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3806 on: August 11, 2009, 04:42:16 PM »
John,

I think Ardmore Ave. was the likely reason but if the Alps hole proved successful they could have found a way to preserve it.

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3807 on: August 11, 2009, 05:29:32 PM »
Between the time the course first broke ground and the time Wilson and Flynn made changes to the course, how much did Merion evolve? How much different of a course was Merion by the end of the '40's from what it was in the beginning?
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3808 on: August 11, 2009, 05:35:25 PM »
Mike Cirba,

I don't think that George Bahto's book porports to list every single possible influence or inspiration for the various holes and features at NGLA or later courses.  There were only three or four templates of famous holes at NGLA and the rest are amalgamations of various features and concepts gleaned from the links courses and Macdonald's and Whigham's application of these concepts and features to the landscape at NGLA.   And to the best of my knowledge Macdonald's and Whigham's writings do not specifically identify every feature or concept that influenced them or their work at NGLA or on later courses.   Nor do we know for certain that Macdonald and Whigham applied the exact same concepts at Merion as they did at NGLA or do we know that they applied the concepts in the exact same way.  In fact it is doubtful that they would have, given the differences in the landscape.  

In short, it is downright silly for you to have expected him only to visit those exact courses which are most often mentioned in conjunction with NGLA and no more.    After all, Wilson was a complete novice before he traveled to NGLA and met with Macdonald, so visiting any links courses would be bound to help, and the more the better.    Also, you oversimplify what happened at NGLA and later courses, and do so to make a point that cuts against all the accounts we have, including this recent one.   Wilson went abroad AFTER Merion had built holes based on the underlying concepts from the great holes abroad, and his goal was to understand and study the great links courses so he could preserve (and perhaps improve upon) what Merion had attempted.  He likely visited all the courses you mention and more.

. . .
I have to admit I'm a bit surprised at this juncture to see the question resurface, "How could Wilson have designed holes based after famous holes abroad if he had not yet visited there?"

Of course, as Jeff or Bryan pointed out, we already know the answer to that question.   In fact, Hugh Wilson himself told us when he stated, "Our ideals were high and fortunately we did get a good start in the correct principles of laying out the holes through the kindness of Messrs. C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham.   We spent two days with Mr. Macdonald at his bungalow near the National Course and in one night absorbed more ideas on golf course construction than we had learned in all the years we had played.  Through sketches and explanations of the correct principles of the holes that form the famous courses abroad, we learned what was right and what we should try to accomplish with our natural conditions.  The next day we spent going over the course and studying the different holes.  Every good course I saw later in England and Scotland confirmed Mr. Macdonald's teachings."

The NGLA visit was of course the source of Hugh Wilson's understanding of the holes abroad, and the visit preceded construction of the initial Merion course.    Wilson and his committee had not only seen (and perhaps received copies of) extremely detailed, scale drawings of the famous holes abroad, but they had also seen Macdonald's template holes based on their concepts, and in some cases, attempts at close replication.

Isn't it about time we stop pretending that they were not planning the actual layout (or at least working on that plan) at the NGLA meetings? The sources indicate they were, and the timing and circumstances indicates they would have been.  This continued portrayal of the NGLA meeting as anything but a meeting to shore up the plans for Merion East is contrary to the record and common sense.

But setting that aside, judging from your post as quoted above, at least we are finally in agreement that at the very least, Wilson was trying to build a golf course according to the CBM model, based on CBM's approach, and using CBM's ideas, concepts, drawings, and golf holes as his models.

Since we agree that this was the case, then what distinguishes Wilson's pre-trip role at Merion from the role Raynor played at other courses, aside from their different aesthetic sensibilities?  To put it another way, aren't we getting to the point where you are drawing a distinction without a difference?   I don't see much reason to differentiate between Wilson's attempt to lay out a CBM course based on CBM's model, his concepts, his drawings, and his golf holes, on the one hand, and Wilson's attempt to lay out a course designed by CBM on the other.  Either way, the original Merion East was intended to be CBM course.

Quote
I also found one interpretation odd as relates to the writer's term, 'green architects".    Someone wrote that the term "apparently applied to green keeper(s)".

Honestly, I'm not sure how anyone could so misunderstand such a very straightforward term as to humorously omit Hugh Wilson from the writer's intent.   I did get a good chuckle out of it, though, so perhaps my sense of humor is returning.  ;)

Whether or not your humor has returned, your ability to accurately comprehend and disseminate information is still nowhere to be found.  I did not omit Hugh Wilson. You just cut off the rest of the sentence which includes the green committee of which Wilson was apparently the chairman.   I wasn't familiar with the phrase "green architect" and mistakenly took this to refer to preserving and maintaining the course.   After TomM clarified I now see that the reference is generally referring to designers trying to emulate the great holes in America.  
_______________________

As for Belmont it remains to be determined what role Campbell (or other professional(s) played in its early design.  What specifically does the 1898 publication by Prosper Sennatt say about Toulman's role at Belmont?
[/quote]
« Last Edit: August 11, 2009, 05:37:59 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3809 on: August 11, 2009, 05:41:51 PM »

Since we agree that this was the case, then what distinguishes Wilson's pre-trip role at Merion from the role Raynor played at other courses, aside from their different aesthetic sensibilities?  To put it another way, aren't we getting to the point where you are drawing a distinction without a difference?   I don't see much reason to differentiate between Wilson's attempt to lay out a CBM course based on CBM's model, his concepts, his drawings, and his golf holes, on the one hand, and Wilson's attempt to lay out a course designed by CBM on the other.  Either way, the original Merion East was intended to be CBM course.



Who employed Seth Raynor?

Who employed/engaged Hugh Wilson?

The answer to those two questions, David, is a very important point which you must intentionally ignore if you are going to make the claim that Merion was a CBM course.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3810 on: August 11, 2009, 05:59:35 PM »

Since we agree that this was the case, then what distinguishes Wilson's pre-trip role at Merion from the role Raynor played at other courses, aside from their different aesthetic sensibilities?  To put it another way, aren't we getting to the point where you are drawing a distinction without a difference?   I don't see much reason to differentiate between Wilson's attempt to lay out a CBM course based on CBM's model, his concepts, his drawings, and his golf holes, on the one hand, and Wilson's attempt to lay out a course designed by CBM on the other.  Either way, the original Merion East was intended to be CBM course.



Who employed Seth Raynor?

I imagine that it was NGLA who hired Raynor, and later Piping Rock, Sleepy Hollow, St. Louis Country Club, Yale, etc.   I doubt it was CBM, for while CBM was a charitable man, he was not paid for his services at NGLA or anywhere else, and so I doubt he was paying Raynor out of his own pocket.

Who employed/engaged Hugh Wilson?

A good question, and perhaps not as clear cut as you think.   I have seen no evidence that Merion's Board of Governor's hired him or even knew officially and specifically of his role.   In contrast, they were very aware of CBM's role as they approved both the initially purchase of the land and the final layout plan based on reports that highlighted M&W's involvement and recommendations.  So far as we know, Wilson wasn't even directly mentioned.

So I imagine it was the Golf Committee, chaired by Robert Lesley, who appointed Wilson and his Construction Committee.  But again Lesley's reports to the Board of Governor's highlight M&W's role not Wilsons.


Quote
The answer to those two questions, David, is a very important point which you must intentionally ignore if you are going to make the claim that Merion was a CBM course.

Ignore them?  Why?  As an Amateur Architect, CBM was never "hired' by anyone.  But he was brought in to help by those lucky enough to get him.  Those same clubs usually hired Raynor, not doubt at CBM's recommendation.  Merion apparently didn't (nor I am aware of any evidence that this was ever recommended or considered,) but this doesn't change the facts that:  Merion went to CBM and HJW for help, M&W provided that help, including (but not limited to) inspecting the site and meeting with the site committee in June of 1910 and reporting on that visit, recommending at least one major change to the property to be purchased, advising Wilson regarding a variety of issues including agronomy issues and the lay out, meeting with Wilson and his committee for two days at NGLA about Merion's lay out in March 1911, reinspecting the site in April 1911 and choosing the final routing plan. 

But Jim, this is again a distinction without a difference.  If Merion set out to build a course based on CBM's advice, principles, methods, drawings, and golf holes, and CBM approved the final layout plan, then Merion was originally a CBM golf course as much as any, and maybe moreso than some. 
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3811 on: August 11, 2009, 06:04:10 PM »
First thing I want to tackle is the "at least one major change to the property to be purchased"...what was that?

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3812 on: August 11, 2009, 06:11:52 PM »
First thing I want to tackle is the "at least one major change to the property to be purchased"...what was that?

The land behind the clubhouse and early location of the 13th hole and quite a bit of the 12.  


And Jim, to digress, the ball will run behind the bunker on the third with a lefty draw.   
« Last Edit: August 11, 2009, 06:13:28 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3813 on: August 11, 2009, 06:21:17 PM »
That's no digression...that's where I would love the conversation to get to eventually because I can learn about CBM's key principles...but the ball rolling to the right when you hook it does not mean a straight shot will roll right...I can tell you that if the green has a left to right tilt its pretty minor...you would have to hook it to use it...I'll grant everything up to this being a good rendition of MY understanding of the Redan concepts.

I capitalized MY because I may well be wrong on what they are.


As to the land behind the clubhouse...didn't his letter say something to the extent of "course can be good so long as you get the land near the clubhouse that you propose buying"? Or something fairly similar which to me clearly indicates they pointed it out as an area they would otherwise like and that they could get...

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Merion Timeline, or Jeff Brauer Unties The Gordian Knot!
« Reply #3814 on: August 11, 2009, 06:51:09 PM »
Maybe not...




Again, for posterity's sake, this is the contents of the  "Macdonald Letter" to the Site Committee;


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.



DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3815 on: August 11, 2009, 08:11:00 PM »
That's no digression...that's where I would love the conversation to get to eventually because I can learn about CBM's key principles...but the ball rolling to the right when you hook it does not mean a straight shot will roll right...I can tell you that if the green has a left to right tilt its pretty minor...you would have to hook it to use it...I'll grant everything up to this being a good rendition of MY understanding of the Redan concepts.

I capitalized MY because I may well be wrong on what they are.

Here is a link to CBM's description of NGLA's Redan with some information describing the concepts.  As for the exact concepts, it has been debated on here many times, but for this discussion I think CBM's examples, including Merion's 3rd, are worth noting. Obviously as he understood it the concept allowed for some flexibility. 


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenglandgreenkeeper.com%2FDocuments%2FGolf-Illustrated_1914_07_Macdonald%2520redan.pdf&ei=UAOCStmaL4vQsQOJwISGCQ&usg=AFQjCNG2cu2kyLBP7Wmr3xH-4EQjb5KNaA&sig2=onRMwMECWZfZda0aGS7s8Q

As for Redan's generally, as a lefty I have not had any luck getting the ball to release and run and I have heard similar things from a number of left-handed golfers so I am not sure that the ball will run well on any redan without the proper spin.  So I'd imagine it might sound strange to a right-hander to even consider the possibility of landing front left and running the ball right at Merion, but from my perspective that seemed a pretty obvious way to try and play it, and miracle-of-miracles, I actually hit the shot I tried to hit (only higher) and it did run as expected.   I recall a pretty good tilt left-to-right, but you obviously know the hole better than me. 

More importantly though, for this discussion, if the hole was considered a redan, then who are we to second guess them?
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3816 on: August 11, 2009, 08:38:27 PM »
"I have seen no evidence that Merion's Board of Governor's hired him or even knew officially and specifically of his role.   In contrast, they were very aware of CBM's role as they approved both the initially purchase of the land and the final layout plan based on reports that highlighted M&W's involvement and recommendations.  So far as we know, Wilson wasn't even directly mentioned."


Sully:

If you're going to take that statement as something to have a conversation about Merion on, I will guarantee you at some point you will need to stop the car, turn around and go back to the intersection and then take the correct road. To say the Merion (MCC) board of governors did not know officially or specifically of Hugh Wilson's role with Merion East just may be the stupidest statement in ten years of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

Wilson was one of the purest "amateur/sportsman" of that era. He never took a cent for anything he did in golf.

Ed Oden

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3817 on: August 11, 2009, 09:17:25 PM »

Since we agree that this was the case, then what distinguishes Wilson's pre-trip role at Merion from the role Raynor played at other courses, aside from their different aesthetic sensibilities?  To put it another way, aren't we getting to the point where you are drawing a distinction without a difference?   I don't see much reason to differentiate between Wilson's attempt to lay out a CBM course based on CBM's model, his concepts, his drawings, and his golf holes, on the one hand, and Wilson's attempt to lay out a course designed by CBM on the other.  Either way, the original Merion East was intended to be CBM course.


Using that logic, Old Macdonald will be a CBM course. 

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3818 on: August 11, 2009, 09:49:23 PM »
"Isn't it about time we stop pretending that they were not planning the actual layout (or at least working on that plan) at the NGLA meetings? The sources indicate they were, and the timing and circumstances indicates they would have been.  This continued portrayal of the NGLA meeting as anything but a meeting to shore up the plans for Merion East is contrary to the record and common sense.

But setting that aside, judging from your post as quoted above, at least we are finally in agreement that at the very least, Wilson was trying to build a golf course according to the CBM model, based on CBM's approach, and using CBM's ideas, concepts, drawings, and golf holes as his models.

Since we agree that this was the case, then what distinguishes Wilson's pre-trip role at Merion from the role Raynor played at other courses, aside from their different aesthetic sensibilities?  To put it another way, aren't we getting to the point where you are drawing a distinction without a difference?   I don't see much reason to differentiate between Wilson's attempt to lay out a CBM course based on CBM's model, his concepts, his drawings, and his golf holes, on the one hand, and Wilson's attempt to lay out a course designed by CBM on the other.  Either way, the original Merion East was intended to be CBM course."






If this Merion/Macdonald/Wilson subject continues on this website, I'm going to step in from time to time and keep REQUOTING the above!

It's a great example of David Moriarty specious or fallacious reasoning! You all can take your pick if it is one or the other or both.

When you see him preface something with "since we agree that this is the case" I warn you all that you should look very very carefully at what it is that he contends that "WE AGREE ON!"     ;) ??? ::) :P

There is no quesiton at all that this man has spent over five years on here trying to convince people that Merion's Hugh I. Wilson was not much more than a member who was asked to oversee that someone else's plan for Merion was CONSTRUCTED.  ;)

In fact Wilson was so much more than that and that is why the architecture of Merion East and West has always been attributed to him and why that attribution is warranteed and historically accurate! And there is no dirth of evidence of that fact and there never has been. He's merely tried to ignore just about all of it! It just fascinates me that more people on here don't call him on it. Why do you suppose that is? It really does fascinate me.


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3819 on: August 12, 2009, 12:31:13 AM »
Using that logic, Old Macdonald will be a CBM course.  

My guess is that Tom Doak, Jim Urbina, and the gang would be thrilled if the world thought so.   I can't think of many higher compliments than that.  

But to be fair to Tom, Jim, and their crew, Hugh Wilson had a number of distinct advantages when it came to building a CBM course.  For one thing, CBM himself was involved in choosing the land for Merion East.  CBM and HJW not only inspected the site, recommended the addition of a small but crucial piece of land, and met with the Golf Committee, the Golf Committee recommended the purchase based largely on CBM's and HJW's opinions.   Not only that, but Wilson was in contact and receiving guidance from CBM from the very beginning of his involvement in the project until at least after the layout plan was finalized.  Plus there were the two days that Wilson and Committee spent at NGLA discussing the layout of Merion East.  And then of course there was the second site visit where CBM and HJWhigham again inspected the land and approved the final layout plan.   In short, even though Tom, Jim, and the crew may be trying to build a course based on CBM's approach, CBM's concepts, and his golf holes, they don't have CBM, except maybe in spirit.   Merion had him in the flesh.  
________________________

Jim, I am sure you understood that I was just using your terminology, and that what I meant was that, as far as I know, Wilson was not selected or appointed by Merion's Board of Governors, nor do they seem to have been at all concerned with what he thought, did, or said.  As I noted, he was likely appointed by the golf committee.
_____________________

. . .
When you see him preface something with "since we agree that this is the case" I warn you all that you should look very very carefully at what it is that he contends that "WE AGREE ON!"     ;) ??? ::) :P
. . .
Multiple sources indicated that the original golf holes at Merion East were based upon great golf holes from abroad.  When I asked how could Wilson have designed a course based on holes he had not seen, Mike Cirba responded:
The NGLA visit was of course the source of Hugh Wilson's understanding of the holes abroad, and the visit preceded construction of the initial Merion course.    Wilson and his committee had not only seen (and perhaps received copies of) extremely detailed, scale drawings of the famous holes abroad, but they had also seen Macdonald's template holes based on their concepts, and in some cases, attempts at close replication.

I agree.  Whatever Wilson knew about the overseas holes, concepts, and features came from CBM and Whigham. So I responded  . . .

. . . judging from your post as quoted above, at least we are finally in agreement that at the very least, Wilson was trying to build a golf course according to the CBM model, based on CBM's approach, and using CBM's ideas, concepts, drawings, and golf holes as his models.


While I am sure Mike will soon backtrack on what he wrote, I am not sure he reasonably can, given what he wrote above. So if you have an issue with it, take it up with your protege.  
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 01:39:12 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3820 on: August 12, 2009, 04:38:58 AM »
More from MC:

All,
 
I quoted from Prosper Senat's "Golfer's Year Book" from 1898, and David Moriarty asked me to state specifically what is mentioned regarding Merion Committee-man's Dr. Harry Toulmin's role in the creation of the original Belmont Cricket Club's Golf course.
 
In that regard, for comparative purposes, let's examine what is mentioned about Merion Cricket Club's original course at the time.
 
Along with a wealth of info on committees, events, records, teams, handicaps, course photos and maps, and other such detailed minutiae is the following;
 
"Links were laid out by Willie Campbell."
 
 
As regards Belmont, along with a wealth of info on committees (Hugh Wilson was on the "Match Committee") records (Hugh Wilson held the course record), teams (Hugh Wilson was number one man on the first team), handicaps (Hugh Wilson was scratch and the next best was Harrison Townsend with an 8 handicap), course photos and maps, and other such detailed minutiae is the following;
 
"Links laid out by H. Townsend, Dr. H. Toulmin, Dr. J.A., Davis"
 
"Number of Holes: Nine"
 
"Professional in Attendance:  Jos. Campbell"
 
If anyone is interested in who laid out any of the other early courses listed at Philly Country Club, Philly Cricket Club, Devon Golf Club, Belfield, Country Club of Atlantic City, and/or Huntingdon Valley Country Club, please just let me know and I'd be happy to provide the info.
 
As an aside, as someone who has had the pleasure of playing golf with both David Moriarty and Jim Sullivan, and as a fellow left-hander with David,  I have to admit that I found the section where David tries to explain how the 3rd at Merion actually functions as a "run on", redan-type shot one of the most hilarious posts in the history of GCA.
 
I suck at golf, and admittedly so, but I also think it's no secret that David isn't much of a player, either, which is also particularly constrained given his traditional, hickory-stick preferences.   That's cool and all, but Jim Sullivan is a few inches short of a bonafide touring professional with virtually any and every shot in his bag, who has also played Merion I'm guessing probably close to 50 or more times versus one time by David.
 
To hear David seriously attempt to explain how his left-handed "draw" took the slope onto the green of the 3rd at Merion, and ran around the bunker to a right-handed hole location...a shot Jim obviously never considered, much less experienced, takes GolfClubAtlas to an entirely new level of hilarity.  ;)
 
Honestly, if we can keep up that kind of fantastic humor on the site, I will certainly go back and beg Ran to reinstate me sooner than later!
  ;D

@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3821 on: August 12, 2009, 07:59:01 AM »
Niall
I don't follow your logic. Please explain.

Tom,

Firstly I conclude that the author of the article didn't meet or speak to Wilson (otherwise he would have mentioned it) but got info from Fernie or someone else who was there.

Author was given first hand account of what Wilson did at Troon ie play golf and then walk course with Fernie taking pictures of Postage Stamp, 11th etc as he went.

Author also given note of Wilsons itinerary and background on Wilson and reason for visit. As he didn't speak to Wilson I'm suggesting that this is second hand info as it would have been based on conversations or hearsay. I'm suggesting that this info is perhaps suspect. Would the itinerary be wrong ? Probably not, a list of names is easy to get right. Was there something lost in the relaying of the purpose of Wilsons visit or his background ? Possibly, I say this because of the strange wording and the reference to Wilson being a member of THE club that has replica holes. Correct me if I'm wrong but NGLA was THE club with replica holes and Merion was A club with replica holes. Wilson was not a member of THE club, therefore, as Sean Connery might say "Shome mishtake shurely".

Niall

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3822 on: August 12, 2009, 08:46:44 AM »
Joe Bausch,

Acting as a shill for Mike Cirba is not your forte.

You're too valuable of a contributor to have to waste your time parroting his replies.

Mike informed us that he was no longer participating, and now we find out that he's participating through a surrogate.

Mike,

Stop the charade and post on your own, or cease posting through Joe or anyone else.

Your self imposed absence is disengenuous.

Come on back and jump into the crossfire.

Joe is not a viable target ;D

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3823 on: August 12, 2009, 09:01:24 AM »
What's the over under on the use of the word "disengenuous" in this thread?

I was flipping the channels last week and saw a use of that word in a 2.5 Men rerun where Alan tries to explain it's meaning to his half witted son Jake.  Sometimes, not only does TV mirror reality, it mirrors the internet, too!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3824 on: August 12, 2009, 09:21:45 AM »
Niall
I don't follow your logic. Please explain.

Tom,

Firstly I conclude that the author of the article didn't meet or speak to Wilson (otherwise he would have mentioned it) but got info from Fernie or someone else who was there.

Author was given first hand account of what Wilson did at Troon ie play golf and then walk course with Fernie taking pictures of Postage Stamp, 11th etc as he went.

Author also given note of Wilsons itinerary and background on Wilson and reason for visit. As he didn't speak to Wilson I'm suggesting that this is second hand info as it would have been based on conversations or hearsay. I'm suggesting that this info is perhaps suspect. Would the itinerary be wrong ? Probably not, a list of names is easy to get right. Was there something lost in the relaying of the purpose of Wilsons visit or his background ? Possibly, I say this because of the strange wording and the reference to Wilson being a member of THE club that has replica holes. Correct me if I'm wrong but NGLA was THE club with replica holes and Merion was A club with replica holes. Wilson was not a member of THE club, therefore, as Sean Connery might say "Shome mishtake shurely".

Niall

Why are those conclusions important in the greater scheme of things? We are discussing Merion and its architectural evolution. It seems to me the important facts to be taken from the article are these:

1. The original design of Merion included features from the famous holes abroad - a la Macdonald
2. Wilson was abroad in 1912 studying those features - a la Macdonald
3. Wilson's itinerary, which may give us a hint into what famous features and holes were included in the original design

Who the source of the information was in the article is immaterial, and the debate over wether the author was confused about the NGLA is not important either.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 09:23:46 AM by Tom MacWood »