News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3825 on: August 12, 2009, 09:28:39 AM »
TMac,

Good morning. Is it a case of Merion's disease, which symptoms include the inability to read a pretty straightforward statement in the English language without automatically presuming it has another deeper meaning, or is flawed outright?

Not slamming anyone in particular here, because we have all done it!  Basically, parsing words in 99% of this thread, finding actual historical sources in about 1%. I appreciate Niall finding that article and all the good work done by others.  But now you have had to respond three times about what you think are the important facts in an article.  Generally I agree with your take on it. 

If the words "a" and "the" override the other hundreds of words in the article as to what it says, I just think that is stretching an interpretation a bit.  We don't know if NGLA was called "the" template club......although, that wouldn't be a terrible name for such a golf course!  Maybe Old Mac should be renamed before its official opening.......

Cheers!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3826 on: August 12, 2009, 10:46:38 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.

Tom

I've tried to explain to you in the best way I can over my last 3 posts that apart from the element of the report that talks about what Wilson did at Troon ie play golf and walk the course with Fernie, the rest should be treated with an element of caution and here you are steaming straight in and stating as a fact above that the article proves Merion had features from famous holes from abroad. Based on what ? Based on the reference to Wilson being  a member the club with the replica holes ?

What if the author got confused by a reference to NGLA and assumed Wilson was a member there ? As I said before Merion/NGLA would only have merited passing interest to the author and his readers so its not hard to imagine "facts" being wrongly reported. Basically its not worth parsing about.

Niall

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3827 on: August 12, 2009, 11:03:03 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.

Tom

I've tried to explain to you in the best way I can over my last 3 posts that apart from the element of the report that talks about what Wilson did at Troon ie play golf and walk the course with Fernie, the rest should be treated with an element of caution and here you are steaming straight in and stating as a fact above that the article proves Merion had features from famous holes from abroad. Based on what ? Based on the reference to Wilson being  a member the club with the replica holes ?

What if the author got confused by a reference to NGLA and assumed Wilson was a member there ? As I said before Merion/NGLA would only have merited passing interest to the author and his readers so its not hard to imagine "facts" being wrongly reported. Basically its not worth parsing about.

Niall

You were not aware Merion had features from the famous holes abroad? There are numerous contemporaneous articles, in both newspapers and magazines, that mention that fact. Most of those articles have been posted on this site over the last year or so, and David's essay mentions a few them. How long have been following the Merion discussions?

Phil_the_Author

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3828 on: August 12, 2009, 12:05:24 PM »
Pat,

You took "Joe Bausch" to task for "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..."

Yet when I "acted as a shill" (your words and not mine) on this very thread a number of times for Tom Macwood posting responses and questions from him before he came back, you uttered not a single word of complaint!

With apologies to Mr. Brauer, this IS disingenuous and wrong. Posting for someone is important as it can open dialogues to get people back to the site regardless of what some may think of them.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3829 on: August 12, 2009, 12:41:10 PM »
David,

Thanks for that link...very helpful.

Notable to me is that the only mention of using or needing the running approach is when the wind is extremely strong behind...also no mention of the green running away but that seems to be a key to some of the better known ones.

In light of that I take back my use of the word "failure" for #3 at Merion...but stick with the comment that thousands of holes are now Redanish that were not yesterday...

The description of the shots required really fit in with an overriding theme TomP and WayneM have frequently mentioned about "Shot-Testing"...can you pull off the shot type of stuff.

Standing on a Redan tee with a slight wind into and being expected to take on the high carry straight over the huge bunker to have  a real chance at par definitely puts into light the way they planned courses back then...especially when 180 was a wood of some sort...

 

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3830 on: August 12, 2009, 02:03:01 PM »
Jim,

I hope you are starting to get the idea of why I hesitate to discuss the specific holes at Merion and their connection to CBM's concepts.   Between TEPaul's insults and indignation and Mike Cirba mailing in his foolish flames, I have trouble seeing how the conversation can be productive. 

As usual, Mike must distort and misrepresent my posts to try and make his point.  Mike quotes me as claiming that Merion's redan allowed for a "'run on'" shot.   I wrote no such thing.  He also mocks me for providing you with my perspective on how the hole played for me, a left-hander.  Not sure whether he is claiming I am lying about my experience or whether I have no business explaining to you how the hole played for me.  Either way he only proves that, absence from the website or not, he reacts only with hysterics and  is incapable of having a civilized discussion.    By the way, Mike is one of the left-handed golfers who has in the past written extensively about how redans play (or don't play) for leftys, so I find his mockery to be particularly ironic. 

Jim, I will assume that if you ask for my take on the hole, you will want me to provide it despite that you are obviously a much better golfer.  Is that a fair assumption?

As for your take on the redan, I don't know if I would go so far as to say there are 100s more redans than yesterday, but would agree that that CBM's understanding was not nearly as constraining as the current understanding.    The tableland is important I think, as is the angled green, as is the fronting or quartering bunker, as is the ability to play at part of the green without challenging the fronting or quartering bunker. 

As for the hole fitting in with the "shot-testing" mentality that TEPaul and Wayne have frequently espoused,  I am not sure I totally agree.  I understand what you mean, but note that at its best the redan does provide an option of playing around or by the bunker instead of over it, at the risk of giving up ground to one's opponent.    Whereas many "shot-testing" holes do not provide such options, at least not short of playing short and taking on the "test" on your next hole. 

_________________________

Philip,

You've got some nerve lecturing Patrick on who he can and cannot take to task, given that your selectiveness in policing these threads has been an absolute joke, with the same people getting scolded for minor aggressionsand others getting a constant pass for outrageous behavior.   I mean look at TEPaul's recents posts, and Cirba's mail-it-in insults as well.  In fact, the majority of Mike's post in question is nothing but a blatant attempt to mock me, yet you have the nerve to compare it to an important post that might open up dialogue?   

Unfortunately Phillip, your self-appointed roll as etiquette expert has accomplished nothing but exposing you as nothing but an enabler of those who cause the problems around here, and a thorn in the side of those who are after a civilized discussion.  Might I suggest you consider your own posts and motivations rather than constantly lecturing a small number of us about ours?   Be the bigger man, Phillip, and stop playing favorites or at least hold your tongue.
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 #3831 on: August 12, 2009, 02:20:25 PM »
More from the artist formerly known as Mike Cirba.  ;)

All,

Despite Patrick's protestations, I have no desire to "jump into the crossfire".   Been there, done that, have the Tee-shirt, and the wasted hours spent in argumentative limbo to prove it.  ;)

Besides, David now seems to think we're in full agreement, so it's gratifying to see he's finally come around to accepting Hugh Wilson and committee as responsible for the routing and hole designs of Merion, with Macdonald and Whigham offering valuable advice and suggestions.  Man, we could have all saved about a net five-year's worth of man-tiime if he'd just offered that admission up sooner!!  ;)  ;D

So, I don't want to continue arguing about the evidence at hand, but as new evidence surfaces or I come across anything of value, I do appreciate Joe giving me an avenue to weigh-in or introduce any findings that might be related.

As such, I've asked Joe to post this because I thik it at least peripherally is of value to the conversation, and interesting on its own merits to students of golf course history.  

I had mentioned the Prosper Senat book as identifying Merion Committeeman Dr. Harry Toulmin as being one of the designers of the original Belmont golf hole course, but there is other information in the book that is pretty cool as well.

It's sort of like the "six degrees of separation" between all of these guys in the early days...

Take Huntingdon Valley Country Club, which appears to have been founded in 1897 by a bunch of guys who were also prominent members of Philladelphia Country Club.    On an earlier thread we mentioned that Alan Wilson was a member of PCC and on their "first team" in competitions.   As it turns out, the original 1897 HVGC members were much the same guys, including George Fowle, the Biddle Boys, Alan D. Wilson, William P. Smith, but also guys like his brother Ab Smith, and also George (The Captain) Thomas.  

Their nine-hole golf course was designed by "Willie Campbell", and crossed public roads five times.

In what was likely a precursor to the "Philadelphia School of Architecture" and it's collaborative approach, less than a year after the course was originally designed the book notes;

"The course as originally laid out by Campbell has lately been rearranged and extended by the Greens Committee."  ;)  ;D

One other interesting tidbit from the book is that the short-lived "Belfield Club" was apparently where A. W. Tillinghast first joined and played on a 9-hole course designed by HVGC pro John Reid.   This might be common knowledge, but I guess I always associated Tilly with Aronimink, and then later Philly Cricket.

Thanks for listening...

Ps...observant readers will recall Ab Smith as not only the first Philly Amateur champion but also the other "expert" mentioned along with Hugh Wilson in the Philadelphia newspapers in the spring of 1913, supposedly prior to any of Wilson's golf courses being opened for play. 

For his part, Smith at that time had not designed any courses but had been instrumental in revising HVGC as head of the Green Committee.  He later would work with Wilson in the design of Cobb's Creek and was involved heavily in the planning and promoting of all other Philly public golf courses as well as being a charter member of Pine Valley.


« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 03:08:15 PM by Joe Bausch »
@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

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3832 on: August 12, 2009, 02:30:22 PM »
David,

You can discuss whatever you want, I react more than dictate around here so I'll jump in or not as the conversation moves.

I know you didn't mention your shot running onto the 3rd green via an approach which is a frequent component of the redan concept so we're OK there...what struck me about your description was hitting "a draw onto the green that ran to the right"...well that's sort of what they do, isn't it? The green at Merion will not steer balls to the right with any noticeable influence. there are sections that may run that way, but also sections that do not.   Regardless, my understanding of the ingredients needed for a Redan today are different than two days ago.

Now, how about the importance of the "tableland"...I always assumed it was important but CBM mentions #3 at Pine Valley which must by 40 feet downhill from tee to green. The green is slightly higher than the surrounding bunkers, but only by a few feet. He seems to disqualify the tableland requirement in the same paragraph as the Merion reference. Isn't there another downhill Redan that always comes up in this conversation?

Once we lose the "tableland"...and the front-to-back sloping green...and the orientation of the green...we are left with a big nasty front corner bunker...and if every hole with a big nasty front corner bunker is a Redan than we have thousands (not hundreds) more today than yesterday.

I am not here to define/redefine the term Redan Hole, only to point out some inconsistencies or failures of logic...

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3833 on: August 12, 2009, 02:33:29 PM »
Ugh. What's the point of registering to post(or not)?

Actually, I like this idea. Any time I want to post something inflammatory, I just say a "friend" emailed me a thought and wants me to post it. That way, I protect my glimmering reputation while tossing barbs into the discussion, a la Barney/ Gillette Silver.

Brilliant and clever. Except even a fool like me figures it out eventually.

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3834 on: August 12, 2009, 04:29:13 PM »
Joe,

I disagree...posting through someone else doesn't shield someone from blame, it just makes both people look bad. I see Phil Young's defense and understand his desire to "bring people back to the site"...


Phil,

What's stopping them from just coming back? How does Mike posting through Joe or Tom M posting through you encourage their return? From what I have seen, Mike will come back when the fighting heats up again and he wants in...similar to Tom's return a couple months ago...

Phil_the_Author

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3835 on: August 12, 2009, 04:38:39 PM »
Jim,

It encourages them to come back because they find themselves as taking part in the discussion instead of staying on the outside. That is what happened with Tom macwood and I was very happy to see him back here. I will also be happy if&when Mike comes back...

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3836 on: August 12, 2009, 05:08:33 PM »
I'd like everyone in as well Phil, I just have a hard time maikng sense of being off the site but participating in the conversations...

"it's like wiping before you poop, it just don't make sense!"

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3837 on: August 12, 2009, 06:15:11 PM »
"Once we lose the "tableland"...and the front-to-back sloping green...and the orientation of the green...we are left with a big nasty front corner bunker...and if every hole with a big nasty front corner bunker is a Redan than we have thousands (not hundreds) more today than yesterday.

I am not here to define/redefine the term Redan Hole, only to point out some inconsistencies or failures of logic..."


Sully:

You make good points there. The only thing Merion's #3 has in common with a redan concept is that big/high bunker on the right that isn't even positioned on the proper diagonal of the big and high redan concept bunker. A tee shot on Merion's 3rd really doesn't "run around that bunker" as on a traditional redan. The best it can do at Merion's #3 is sort of filter left to right towards it.

Given that natural landform (Merion's 3rd) which before the golf course was the higher grade level (hayloft level) of a "bank" barn, the way to have made it into a tradition redan would be to play at it from somewhere over to the right of the 6th hole from about 200 yards. That way the natural topography behind the present green could act like the fairway kicker that filters the ball from right to left and around the big deep bunker to the right of the present green. But obviously that arrangement would not have fit well into the routing sequencing of a long narrow L like that site is.

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3838 on: August 12, 2009, 06:36:45 PM »
Sully:

I tell you what. Since for some reason you say you are actually trying to learn what the traditional redan concept and playability is, I am going to endeavor to either take you to or arrange for you to play both Piping Rock and NGLA. The redans on those two courses are certainly the best and most tradition redan concepts I know of in America. And if I do it for you I very much want to have you play them when the ground is firm and fast otherwise I don't think you will see and feel the ideal effect of what those two holes ask and perhaps demand of the golfer.

I guess I've played both of them hundreds of times over my life and even though I played at scratch over maybe 20-25 years I was never very long with my irons (BTW my irons were sort of close to normal length compared to my driver which was really short) and I never hit the ball all that high. When the ground (approach and green) was ideally firm and fast for me the only way to hold the ball on those two greens was to play it off the fairway "kicker" and get it to filter onto the green with the proper "weight." There is no question in my mind that the so-called traditional "redan shot" is fairly one dimensional but nevertheless one of the most exciting shots in all of golf to pull off correctly. It does take experience too.

Now I do admit that from my day to yours things have changed. In my day even a very good player could not take even a high shot over that bunker and keep the ball on those two greens in ideally firm and fast conditions but some of these players today might be able to (including you). I say this recently mindful of that shot Woods hit on #16 with a stratospheric 8 iroin from 182 yards to clinch the Firestone championship.  He could hit that shot and probably with that club right over those redan bunkers at NGLA or Piping and hold it on the green. Even when I was playing my best, to get the same result I would have to play a 4-5 iron off that fairway kicker.

I know this explanation will make good sense to you!  ;)

Phil_the_Author

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3839 on: August 12, 2009, 06:47:18 PM »
Sully,

I agree. Yet when asked to post something i have always done so without judgment...

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3840 on: August 12, 2009, 07:39:55 PM »
David,

You can discuss whatever you want, I react more than dictate around here so I'll jump in or not as the conversation moves.

I know you didn't mention your shot running onto the 3rd green via an approach which is a frequent component of the redan concept so we're OK there...what struck me about your description was hitting "a draw onto the green that ran to the right"...well that's sort of what they do, isn't it? The green at Merion will not steer balls to the right with any noticeable influence. there are sections that may run that way, but also sections that do not.   Regardless, my understanding of the ingredients needed for a Redan today are different than two days ago.

Like I said, Jim, my memory of the hole is that there was a left to right slope, but that is based on my brief experience from a number of years ago so maybe my recollection fails me or has been influenced from excessive conversation on the issue.   As for hitting a draw that runs right (and back), that may be what yours automatically do (or the opposite if you golf right handed), but my shots generally need some help from the ground slope especially when I hit hickories, and I think that Redan's are generally designed to provide a little help in this regard.   More specifically, I think Redans are generally designed to help a righty draw run back and to the the left, so that the golfer can access a pin behind the bunker without directly challenging the bunker.    

Two things to possibly consider here, with regard to Merion's particular Redan.

1.  We are discussing a hole that was built 98 years ago.  I cannot say for certain that the green contours and the prevailing slope are exactly the same now as it was then.  Can you?  Before Mike makes Joe post another of his embarrassingly hysterical posts, let me explain.   I am NOT suggesting that the green used to slope significantly from front to back.  Given the shape of the landforms I would be surprised if this was the case.   But on old greens with which I am familiar it is very common for the areas adjacent to bunkers to get built up over time due to sand splash.   And it isn't uncommon for green contours and slopes to soften or at least to change over the years due to maintenance, sanding, top-dressing etc.  Did any of this happen at Merion?  I don't know.  But I do know that I cannot make definitive pronouncements about the green contours 98 years ago.   For me it is enough that men like Findlay, Lesley and CBM himself thought it a reverse Redan, and so I assume it worked like a reversed redan was supposed to work. .

2.  But how was a REVERSED Redan supposed to work?  As was noted on a recent thread, the concept of the REVERSED Redan is sort of strange given that for the vast majority of golfers a REVERSED Redan doesn't work worth a damn as a Redan.  Many a lefty (including Mike Cirba) has argued that Redans do not help a left handed fade, and I presume that reversed Redans do not do much to help a righty move the ball back and to the right.  At the very least, it presents a different set of strategic challenges.    Because of this I wonder whether or not the run up area and the slight front to back slope of the green were considered integral to the reversed Redan?  I don't know the answer, but it seems odd to criticize a hole for not having a slope that very few golfers would ever be able to properly utilize.  

I view these concepts as more functional than formulaic and as much as I hate to admit it as a lefty, a run-up area and a front-to-back slope on a reverse redan would usually be more formulaic than functional.   Anecdotally, The green on LACC's reversed Redan (if it is one) doesn't slope from front to back either, or at least it didn't last time I played it.


Now, how about the importance of the "tableland"...I always assumed it was important but CBM mentions #3 at Pine Valley which must by 40 feet downhill from tee to green. The green is slightly higher than the surrounding bunkers, but only by a few feet. He seems to disqualify the tableland requirement in the same paragraph as the Merion reference. Isn't there another downhill Redan that always comes up in this conversation?

M&W did not exactly call Pine Valley hole a Redan.  Here is what they wrote:

A beautiful short hole with the Redan principle will be found on the new Philadelphia course at Pine Valley. Here also the tee is higher than the hole, so that the player overlooks the tableland.


Not sure what they meant by a "short hole with the redan principle" or what principle they meant or whether or not they considered this a true Redan.   Does the green slope away?  Is there a run-up area?   I do notice, though, that they viewed the Pine Valley green as built on a "tableland," but with the tee overlooking the tableland.   So I don't think we can throw away the tableland criteria.  

(My speculation on CBM's mention of this hole is that it could have been one of CBM's suggestions for Pine Valley that Crump followed, but maybe this is just indication that I too have been impacted by the sour caricature of CBM that has been bandied about for so many years on this website.)

CBM also wrote of Sleepy Hollow's "reversed" Redan, "where the tee instead of being about level with the green is much higher."  But again, because it is a Reverse redan, I am not sure the same exact characteristics are necessary.     Does Sleepy Hollow's reverse redan front to back?   Left to right?  Is there an area to run the ball up?


Once we lose the "tableland"...and the front-to-back sloping green...and the orientation of the green...we are left with a big nasty front corner bunker...and if every hole with a big nasty front corner bunker is a Redan than we have thousands (not hundreds) more today than yesterday.

Again, I am not sure we have lost the tableland.  Nor am I sure we have lost the orientation of the green.  Nor am I sure we have lost slope that allows the golfer to work the ball around the bunker instead of playing over it (especially for conventional as opposed to reversed redans.)  But there was obviosly some flexibility in the concept.

I am not here to define/redefine the term Redan Hole, only to point out some inconsistencies or failures of logic...

And I am not trying to claim that the understanding of what constituted a Redan was always consistent or perfectly logical.   For example, conventional Redans are much more logical for the vast majority of golfers than Reversed Redan's.   Redans varied depending on the setting in which they were built.  Recall that M&W noted that there could be "infinite variations" on the concept on any course.  And they also noted:  "And when you come to think of it that is the secret of most of the great holes all over the world.  They all have some kind of a twist."

 
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 07:41:47 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)

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3841 on: August 12, 2009, 07:59:52 PM »
"2.  But how was a REVERSED Redan supposed to work?  As was noted on a recent thread, the concept of the REVERSED Redan is sort of strange given that for the vast majority of golfers a REVERSED Redan doesn't work worth a damn as a Redan.  Many a lefty (including Mike Cirba) has argued that Redans do not help a left handed fade, and I presume that reversed Redans do not do much to help a righty move the ball back and to the right.  At the very least, it presents a different set of strategic challenges.    Because of this I wonder whether or not the run up area and the slight front to back slope of the green were considered integral to the reversed Redan?  I don't know the answer, but it seems odd to criticize a hole for not having a slope that very few golfers would ever be able to properly utilize.   

I view these concepts as more functional than formulaic and as much as I hate to admit it as a lefty, a run-up area and a front-to-back slope on a reverse redan would usually be more formulaic than functional.   Anecdotally, The green on LACC's reversed Redan (if it is one) doesn't slope from front to back either, or at least it didn't last time I played it."



Well, then perhaps it would significantly help your architectural education and your knowledge of the reverse redan to listen to the opinions of some who remember and played arguably the world's best reverse redan, the way it was designed and the way it played. It might even whet your appetite for your education to hear who it was designed by. Or, on the other hand, perhaps not!  ;)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3842 on: August 12, 2009, 08:05:46 PM »
Well, then perhaps it would significantly help your architectural education and your knowledge of the reverse redan to listen to the opinions of some who remember and played arguably the world's best reverse redan, the way it was designed and the way it played. It might even whet your appetite for your education to hear who it was designed by. Or, on the other hand, perhaps not!  ;)

Why is it it that you constantly try to make this a giant episode of "I know more than you do?"  Is it because you have been embarrassed so badly on the Merion issue and now the Myopia issue, so that you feel like you have to constantly bring up your superior connections and experiences, even though you apparently could not research your way into or out of a library for the past 10 years while you have been claiming expertise on these issues?   Or are you just a complete asshole, unable to control yourself?

Like Tom MacWood, I have no further interest in playing these games with you.  If you have something to add to the conversation, then do so.   Otherwise spare us your pompous crap.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 08:07:34 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)

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3843 on: August 12, 2009, 08:17:50 PM »
"Why is it it that you constantly try to make this a giant episode of "I know more than you do?"  Is it because you have been embarrassed so badly on the Merion issue and now the Myopia issue, that you feel like you have to constantly bring up your superior connections and experiences, even though you apparently could not research your way into or out of a library for the past 10 years while you have been claiming expertise on these issues?   Or are you just a complete asshole, unable to control yourself?

Like Tom MacWood, I have no further interest in playing games with you.  If you have something to add to the conversation, then do so.  Otherwise shut the hell up. "



I was about to explain to you the design and characteristics of the reverse redan at The Links Club (NLE). I wanted to mention it because of its sublime reverse redan characteristics and playability.  I have never know one like it----eg I doubt one like it has ever existed. That golf course has been gone for maybe twenty years and as far as I know no one on this board ever saw that hole with the possible exception of Tom Doak.

In my opinion, it was not only the best reverse redan ever done but arguably one of the greatest par 3s, period, I have ever seen. And since I remember it I thought perhaps you, and others, might like to learn something about it from my recollections of it. Perhaps Doak can weigh in on it.

I thought you were interested in learning about architecture but perhaps you think you already know everything there is to know including holes and courses you've never seen or played but others have and consequently have something to offer on here because of it.

« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 08:28:12 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3844 on: August 12, 2009, 08:26:20 PM »
BUT, I suppose there was no reason for me to expect anything from you other than something like that last post response of yours just above. What else is there to expect from a totally adverserial and insecure little shit like you? You are completely marginalized on this website and eveywhere else of a modicum of importance so just blabber on Moriarty as you definitely have NOTHING to lose at this point!

Expect anything from me?  This is exactly what I am talking about!   What the hell do I have to do with whether or not you have something to contribute to the conversation?  

I've grown tired of you begging us to beg you to tell us what you are dying to tell us anyway. It is nothing but narcissism and insecurity run amuck. If you have something to say and it advances the conversation, say it.  If not, take your pompous crap and go away.   It is your decision and has nothing to do with me.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 08:28:17 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)

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3845 on: August 12, 2009, 09:07:11 PM »
I'm going to let that go; there's no point in pursuing it on here; but this is not exactly the real world we all actually live in.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2009, 09:08:53 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3846 on: August 12, 2009, 09:44:28 PM »
I'm going to let that go; there's no point in pursuing it on here; but this is not exactly the real world we all actually live in.

Imagine.  TEPaul in the real world.  Now that is funny.
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)

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3847 on: August 13, 2009, 06:09:45 AM »
Tom Mac

Re your post 3935, are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just having a laugh ?

The discussion was about what a Scottish writer, living in Scotland in 1912, knew about Merion. It was not about what I know in 2009.

Niall

TEPaul

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3848 on: August 13, 2009, 08:08:56 AM »
Niall:

Unfortunately, your question has become a common one with a growing number of observers and participants!

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion's Early Timeline
« Reply #3849 on: August 13, 2009, 09:15:51 AM »
Guys,

Stop with the sniping and stick to the issues.

Thanks

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back