Merion's Early Timeline

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Whoa pardner!  Not so fast.  I am not ready to concede that one yet.

Having not seen Columbia and any other Barker course other than Druid Hills in Atlanta (which I didn't know was Barker when I saw it) I will take Tom Mac's word for it that he was a pretty good router with talent and that his career was sadly cut short by WWI before he fully developed into what he might have been.  We know CBM's record which is stout, and so is Wilson's in a limited portfolio.

Besides, the real test is STILL routings that get built and methinks you are stuck on the goose egg on that one!

But we can christen you sixty minute cirba.

[Rich Goodale]

According to Columbia's website, their ~1910 course was routed by Walter Travis.  No mention of Barker.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff,

As long as it's not "sixty second Cirba" I'll take it!  

Bryan,

Maybe this will help..

If the golf course was already routed and the 117 acres specifically identified prior to Nov 15, 1910 as per the Francis Literal interpretation. Then why in Dec 1910 would Cuyler advise Lloyd to take 161 acres...ALL of the 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate...under title in his name?

Why not just take the 117 supposedly pre-routed acres and start building the road?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Rich,

Tom MacWood had credited it to Barker, and I looked it up in Whitten's book, which corroborates.

Boy, is there just no end to the conspiracies these eastern clubs will go to in denying true architectural attributions?

Mike, 

How about "six second Cirba?"  Ouch. That hurts even to type it.....

TePaul and I had an interesting conversation while I was driving to lunch today on that subject. In general, we discussed the economics of the project from a developers perpective and that would actually be a fascinating exploration to explore - while clearly an artistic success, did Lloyd and HDC make the money they anticipated by selling MCC a third of their land?

Anyway, we came up with two theories on that -

Lloyd probably took the land personally, to keep the transaction at arms length, since he was on the board of HDC and MCC.  But, we also have to remember that Lloyd was involved in HDC and presumably wanted to at least break even. (With Allgates going in he wanted his club nearby, and clearly was concerned that MCC members get a good deal, so his motiviations were slightly different than Connells who presumably wanted to max out profit.

Lloyd and Connell, et al, may not have totally trusted each other. Or, at least it makes sense to keep your leverage "just in case" things don't work out.  In other words, Lloyd kept the deed of about half the acreage in his name, Connell kept what he had contributed under Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Co. and they had kind of a detente - niether could back out or move forward without the other because each separately owned half the asset to be developed further.

Again, that is another Brauer theory and many are probably sick of hearing me spout off - hell, I'M Tired of hearing me spout off.  That said, I have seen similar arrangements on similar business developments.

[Mike_Cirba]

So, you're saying that they proposed to buy 3 acres from HDC.  There is no record of such a purchase actually happening.  And, in April Lloyd on behalf of MCC owned the 161 acres of Johnson and Dallas land, so if they were buying it from HDC then it must have been outside of the Johnson/Dallas tracts.  Is that what you're saying, that they bought 3 acres from HDC that was outside the Johnson/Dallas tract?  [/size][/color]

Bryan,

Lloyd didn't own the 161 acres in April, at least not technically.   He had taken title for HDC under his name.

Merion had "secured" only an offer to buy 117 acres back in November 1910, and that was the offer for the amount of land that went to the Board for approval (accepted) and then solicited to membership in the form of bond sales at that time.

The 3 acres of land that was added was just outside that working boundary defined by the approximate road, west of it...the Francis Swap, if you will...  

It was still Johnson Farm Land.   Merion had to agree to purchase those 3 additonal acres from HDC, which raised the total purchase to 120.

In the end, HDC only developed 218 acres for real estate, not the 221 originally planned.   That was due to the Francis Swap.

Make sense?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan Izatt,

Why are you engaging in an exercise of trying to fit today's golf course into the property configuration circa 1910-11-12 ?

Is it Mike Cirba and Jeff Brauer's contention that todays golf course as represented by your google earth image is the same golf course, in every way, that existed in 1910-11-12 ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat Mucci,

Geez.  You are really silly in how you are trying to distract the debate.

Jeff,

Some moron has broker into your computer and is posting under your name on GCA.com.
Evidently, he's unable to chew gum and walk at the same time as he can't follow two (2) distinct discussions within a thread with 57 pages and counting

I wouldn't give your post the dignity of an answer if I were Mike, and I wouldn't do it either, but its an easy add on to my answer to Jim Sullivan.

Yet, you continue to chime in with your two cents.

Among the things I find the silliest is your double negatives - there is no proof that it is not true, basically.  To anyone schooled in logic, it does not follow that there is proof that it is true.

This moron doesn't understand the error of his logic where he allows Mike Cirba to conclude that the Barker routing wasn't substantive because there's no proof that the committee/Board viewed the routing, which, incidently, was attached to Barker's letter, because there's no proof that the routing was included with the documents presented in the committee/Board report, even though the routing was attached to Barker's letter, and then reject the logic where someone concludes that you can't exclude the Barker routing as being substantive just because it doesn't seem to have been included with the letter that was viewed by the committee/Board.

Common sense would seem to dictate that any and every board member would have seen the routing attached to the letter, if for no other reason than curiosity.  As to exhibits attached to reports, they're frequently included in reports presented to the board, but not mentioned in board minutes.

But, that's why common sense isn't so common. 

You are pounding the table again Johnny Cochran. I guess you figure if it worked once...............

You continually fail to examine the content and merit of the text, prefering to reject it based on it's color.
Now, I'm not calling you a racist, but you seem to be a greenaphobe

Mike,

Given Barkers description of a "rough routing" I bet it was graphically very similar to yours, only not drawn on an aerial photo, just on a map.  When a gca describes his own work as "rough" you know its nothing special or final. 

How do you KNOW that ?
That's pure speculation on your part.
You accuse me of being illogical and then you resort to logic of the absurd, absent any facts to support it.

Yet, Pat and a few others take it as gospel that it was a virtuoso masterpiece. 

That's a distortion of the truth and a blatant lie.
That's never been my position and you know it.
Now you're engaging in the same absurd tactics of extremes and exaggerations that Cirba's made famous on the Merion threads

I susbscribe to your toilet paper fate for that routing! 

Actually, since Connell paid for it,

Why would a smart, successful professional pay for a "toilet paper" product ?
Does that seem logical to you ?

I wonder if any of you Philly boys could track down successor companies or descendents who might have records of it. 
We know MCC doesn't have it.

How do you know that ?
You only know what you've been told by parties favorably disposed to an outcome that seems to have been predisposed.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

Sadly, it was me. I am sorry for venting some frustrations at you, even if I am beginning to think you are a world class knucklehead!  Allowing you to bring me back in to a pointless debate is a character flaw of mine, I admit.

I never allowed MIKE C to conclude that "the Barker routing wasn't substantive because there's no proof that the committee/Board viewed the routing".  We all know they viewed it. In one of my posts, I argued that subsequent events rendered in non-substantive in the history or Merion, or more accurately, in the final form that Merion East assumed.  Period.

BTW, Barkers letter that your refer to says he is enclosing a rough sketch.  I am not assuming anything, just taking the man at his word.

As to the virtuoso comment, since the specific debate on this thread is to determine the Merion East Timeline, I have asked you just how (and as you demand) with what FACTS do you surmise any portion of the Barker Routing made it into the final form of Merion?  If you have answered that in all your bluster I have missed it.  If I want someone to repeatedly tell me I am wrong without really listening to me, I believe I will return to my ex wife. As hard as this will be to believe to readers of this web site, she is even more repetitive, less logical and more of a bulldog than you are.  A real sweetheart, both of you!

In actual FACT, MCC talked to Barker (hired by Connell) and they talked to CBM.  They moved forward using CBM's advice.  They did NOT move forward using Barkers advice.  They talked to two of the leading golf course experts in June of 1910 and made their selection to have CBM assist them.  Ask me, Tom Doak or any gca and you will soon here that they may have done some speculative and/or paid preliminary routings and then not gotten the job. 

That seems to be what happened to Barker.  While he claimed "20 projects" in that June 10 letter, according to Cornish and Whitten he had but three completed projects by then (to 2 for CBM, but CBM's were more highly regarded)  He prepared a quick sketch routing, for another party, and apparently not even if required by his engagement to Connell (although I don't know that for sure)  Yes, it was seen by MCC.

However, in my estimation, for it to be substantive, it would have had to be, well..... USED.... by MCC in later work rather than discarded. 

Are you going to argue that an unused routing not paid for by MCC is substantive?  Or are you prepared to show some proof other than some more bluster, or alleging a Philly conspiracy that it had some substance?

[Rich Goodale]

Rich,

Tom MacWood had credited it to Barker, and I looked it up in Whitten's book, which corroborates.

Jeff

I wouldn't believe everything I read in Whitten's book, if I were you....

Rich

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

In fact, my quick routing (call me quarter hour Brauer) did basically use your green parcel, although I extended it to the Nov 15 road rather than the final road you seem to show. Its still too narrow.

Jeff,

Except in your routing example you cheated and used "land west of today's course that was not part of any golf layout.".  

Even with using the extra land that Francis told us they weren't using you STILL couldn't fit those five championship finishing holes into the land that was left if you take Francis literally!!  

Slacker!!    


There is no way they would have routed 13 holes if all they had left was that little sliver around the quarry.   They would have had to have been certifiably insane.

Espeically with 17 acres of gently rolling land across from the clubhouse that they had supposedly somehow deemed "not part of any golf layout".

The literal interpretation of Francis's words makes no sense under any realistic scenario, as you know.

Mike,

You can't emoticon it off.  Jeff tried to route the 5 holes inside the "approximate" road boundary and they don't really fit.  Don't mudify it with references to the land that wasn't part of any golf layout.  The point was that there wasn't enough room to fit the 5 holes in, just as Francis said.  It's supports perfectly the need for the swap.

[Bryan Izatt]

..............


I understand what you've laid out, but I don't understand why these facts make taking a literal interpretation of Francis' words absolutely preposterous.  It's simple math, Bryan.

If we give the Committee all of the land north of the club house out to the historical western boundary of Johnson Farm, but truncated at Haverford College as you suggest Francis had to mean, that give us a total of roughly 1545 ft x 1050 ft, or 37.2 acres.

Doesn't sound too bad for five holes, right?

Only we know that Francis said that they weren't going to use the land west of GHR for any golf layout, so the area west of GHR and north of the clubhouse is slightly over half the area, or roughly 9 acres, so we're down to 28.2 acres.

Then, we have the quarry, which was unusable for fairways, greens, or tees.

The quarry measures out roughly at 540 ft x 450 ft, or another 5.5 acres, leaving a total of 22.7 acres to build the final five holes of their championship course, and only one of them can be a par three!   It's an exercise in futility, and if I took you out on the property tomorrow you could see instantly that it could never have worked, not even on paper!  

There is no way they would have routed 13 holes knowing that they only had 22.7 acres left to build the final five holes!!

Or said another way, it's basically like trying to cram five finishing holes into the Dallas Estate!     

................................
  

Well, so far you've said that Francis wasn't addled, or having a senior moment, he was just trying the summarize a complex transaction.  Now you're saying that "There is no way they would have routed 13 holes knowing that they only had 22.7 acres left to build the final five holes!!".  But Francis said it wasn't very difficult to fit the first 13 holes in, but the last 5 were another story.  So, how do you want to revise this statement of Francis'.  Did he misstate that they had fit the first 13 holes in?  Or that the last 5 were a different story?  After all, you say that there is no way they could have routed the 13 holes knowing that there wasn't enough room for the remaining 5. 

[Bryan Izatt]

Jeff,

As long as it's not "sixty second Cirba" I'll take it!  

Bryan,

Maybe this will help..

If the golf course was already routed and the 117 acres specifically identified prior to Nov 15, 1910 as per the Francis Literal interpretation. Then why in Dec 1910 would Cuyler advise Lloyd to take 161 acres...ALL of the 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate...under title in his name?

Why not just take the 117 supposedly pre-routed acres and start building the road?

Mike,

In trying hard to remain neutral, I'd like to base my opinions on documents that I've seen.  I haven't seen Cuyler's letters, so I find it hard to comment on what they say.

As a Phillie area resident, when do you suppose that they would have begun building the road, now that you mention it.  It was finished in July, 1911.  When did they start?  Do you build roads in that part of the country in winter?

[Bryan Izatt]

Rich,

Tom MacWood had credited it to Barker, and I looked it up in Whitten's book, which corroborates.

Boy, is there just no end to the conspiracies these eastern clubs will go to in denying true architectural attributions?

Mike, 

How about "six second Cirba?"  Ouch. That hurts even to type it.....

TePaul and I had an interesting conversation while I was driving to lunch today on that subject.  And, how is Tom doing?  Just think, if he wasn't on enforced hiatus from the site, this thread could be 100 pages long now.   In general, we discussed the economics of the project from a developers perpective and that would actually be a fascinating exploration to explore - while clearly an artistic success, did Lloyd and HDC make the money they anticipated by selling MCC a third of their land?

As a tangent, it is interesting to note that the Philadelphia & Ardmore Land Company bought the Johnson Farm from Gebhard Fecht on February 21, 1907 for $48,000.  On December 16, 1910 they sold it via Rothwell to HDC and then again through Rothwell to Lloyd.  When it was sold to Lloyd for $1, it was encumbered with three mortgages - one for $85,000, one for $60,000 and one for $34,000.  In July, 1911 when Lloyd sold it via Rothwell to MCC, it was only encumbered by the $85,000 mortgage.  Sounds like some interesting financial finagling there in the middle. At the same time HDC bought the Dallas Estate for $21,020.  Total outlay for the Johnson Farm and the Dallas Estate was $69,020.  Bottom line to Connell, he paid $69,020 for 161 acres and sold 120 of it to MCC for $85,000.  Profit of $16,000 and he get to keep the back 40 for housing.  Profitable?  Ya think.  And, MCC thinks they got a good price too.   

Anyway, we came up with two theories on that -

Lloyd probably took the land personally, to keep the transaction at arms length, since he was on the board of HDC and MCC.   How is that arms length, if he's on both boards. Sounds like insider trading to me.  Where are the lawyers?  But, we also have to remember that Lloyd was involved in HDC and presumably wanted to at least break even. (With Allgates going in he wanted his club nearby, and clearly was concerned that MCC members get a good deal, so his motiviations were slightly different than Connells who presumably wanted to max out profit.

Lloyd and Connell, et al, may not have totally trusted each other. Or, at least it makes sense to keep your leverage "just in case" things don't work out.  In other words, Lloyd kept the deed of about half the acreage in his name, Connell kept what he had contributed under Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Co.    P & A Land Co. (PALCO  ) contributed the Johnson Farm.  Lloyd got it. Connell didn't keep it.  and they had kind of a detente - niether could back out or move forward without the other because each separately owned half the asset to be developed further.

Again, that is another Brauer theory and many are probably sick of hearing me spout off - hell, I'M Tired of hearing me spout off.  That said, I have seen similar arrangements on similar business developments.

[Bryan Izatt]

So, you're saying that they proposed to buy 3 acres from HDC.  There is no record of such a purchase actually happening.  And, in April Lloyd on behalf of MCC owned the 161 acres of Johnson and Dallas land, so if they were buying it from HDC then it must have been outside of the Johnson/Dallas tracts.  Is that what you're saying, that they bought 3 acres from HDC that was outside the Johnson/Dallas tract?  [/size][/color]

Bryan,

Lloyd didn't own the 161 acres in April, at least not technically.   He had taken title for HDC under his name.

Lloyd did own it legally.  The deed is in his name alone.  Tom has claimed many times that it was on behalf of MCC - not HDC as you state here.  Are you saying Tom is wrong.  Here is one of Tom's references:

2.            DEC, 19, 1910; The date of the transfer of the 117 acres into the names Horatio G. Lloyd et ux for MCC that would become the majority of the world famous Merion East golf course; Reflected in a deed dated Dec. 19, 1910.

That is a FACT. That deed has been in Merion G.C.’s archives for years as well as in the Recorder of Deeds in the County seat..

Now, mind you, Tom is wrong about it being "et ux".  There is no "et ux" in the deed. Just Lloyd alone.  Are you and Tom suggesting that there was a side deal/contract between MCC and Lloyd saying that MCC really owned it and not Lloyd, despite the deed?

Merion had "secured" only an offer to buy 117 acres back in November 1910, and that was the offer for the amount of land that went to the Board for approval (accepted) and then solicited to membership in the form of bond sales at that time.

The 3 acres of land that was added was just outside that working boundary defined by the approximate road, west of it...the Francis Swap, if you will...  

It was still Johnson Farm Land.  Yes, and Lloyd owned it legally (or on behalf of MCC in Tom's claim).   Merion had to agree to purchase those 3 additonal acres from HDC,    No, they didn't.  Lloyd (or Lloyd on behalf of MCC) owned it.  which raised the total purchase to 120.

In the end, HDC only developed 218 acres for real estate, not the 221 originally planned.   That was due to the Francis Swap.

Make sense?  No, for the reasons above.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan Izatt,

Why are you engaging in an exercise of trying to fit today's golf course into the property configuration circa 1910-11-12 ?  I wasn't.  I did ask Jeff and Mike to try to route CBM's recommended mix of holes withing the property lines.  You can see for yourself how that turned out.  The Google aerial was just a convenient tool to context the property boundaries.  Clearly, the early course was not like the current course.

Is it Mike Cirba and Jeff Brauer's contention that todays golf course as represented by your google earth image is the same golf course, in every way, that existed in 1910-11-12 ?  I don't know, you should ask them, although I suspect that this is a rhetorical question.

[Mike_Cirba]

Bryan,

I think you're missing my point entirely.

There was not enough room to build the last five holes under either scenario.

The irony here is that your own measurements and overlays prove that if the 1910 Land Plan was the working boundary, per Jeff's theory, the holes don't only not fit, but neither does the 15th green as per Francis.  Neither does the 14th green and the whole left half of the 15th fairway.   OJ's gloves fit better.

But, What Jeff's theory has going for it and why it's correct is if you add the land that didn't fit and subtract the land where they had land unused against the Land Plan, the numbers of acres purchased comes out perfectly!

Now, by contrast, stating that the Literal Interp of Francis theory doesn't have enough room for the last five holes might be the most obvious understatement of the year!  It's like saying Amy Winehouse has some substance abuse issues!! 

But it's so short on available land that it's wholly preposterous to believe that reasonably intelligent men would have routed 13 holes all the time realizing they were painting themselves into a 22 acre broom closet for their 5 finishing holes!

It also asks us to believe another ridiculous contention that they had 17 acres of perfectly fine gently rolling land across the street from the clubhouse that for some insane reason just arbitrarily decided not to use!

But the final reason the Literal Interp of Francis is wrong is because you've proved it yourself; NONE of the numbers or calculations work against the historical documents!!   

They are not even close and that's the one inescapable fact and irony here, Bryan.

You have proved that David Moriarty's theory, and the Literal Interpretation of Francis it was based on, is incorrect.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bryan,

Tom is doing fine.  You can tell from his voice that his blood pressure has dropped 20 points since leaving this site. In fact, I have my annual physical next week and I highly suspect my doctor will recommend the same strategy if my blood pressure has gone up. Is she doesn't, I will! Actually, getting pokes and prodded in unmentionable places will seem quite pleasant this year, after this Merion thread, so I guess it has some theraputic value.....

Thanks for supplying those land numbers.  TEPaul and I were noting that none of us had been considering the land side of the deal, specifically the notion that MCC could take ANY 117 acres.  It had to make sense for the developer, too, and thus, the approximate road which fit in their subdivision plans.

I recall that the entire 330 acres was made up of 5 parcels, no?  

Dallas Estate -   $21,000
Johnson Farm - $48,000
?
?
?
MCC Sale - Add $85,000

_____________________
Net Cost to HDC?

What were the other parcels and how much did they cost, if you know?  MCC certainly did pay a chunk of their land cost.  Of course, they still had to build roads and subdivide the lots.  But I know from experience that if you can do a development with low net basis in land, and with some pre-sales, it makes it a darn sight easier to do.  This is really a slam dunk on the surface, given how "hot" that real estate market was at that time.

While Connell and Nicholson were not poor, the fact that Lloyd capitalized HDC to the tune of $300,000 meant they could still use a heavy hitter to finance theiir project.  Cash flow is typically an issue in the early stages for any development, as there are huge outlays a few years before lots can be sold.  Clearly, Lloyd's money AND the promise of many early pre-sales to MCC members desiring to live near the course were both motivators for Connell to do this deal.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike C,

While you are non-plussed that no one acknowledges your routing prowess, I am similarly non-plussed that my "theory" hasn't been universally accepted yet!

I have even been told privately that my logic is circular and proves nothing, that of course 123-6+3+120.  But, if that road boundary enclosed 117 acres, then 117-6+3 = 116. If it included, say 126, then 126-6+3+123.  The fact that I use actual documents and the numbers do match says something to me.

However, others tell me that my theory is "speculation" because I "assume" that their aren't other conflicting documents that no one has seen in 90 years and that I can't discount other explanations because "all the facts" aren't in.  I find it hilarious that my theory is considered speculation, while every other theory out there requires speculation that other documents exist and say exactly what they need to say:

For DM - +/-100 letters between MCC and CBM before Nov 15
For Tom Mac - a train ticket for Barker showing a stop in Ardmore
For Others: A new mythical boundary map prepared between Nov 15 and April 19

While I would gladly accept being wrong on this one small part of MCC history, I live by the "One in hand is better than two in bush" theory.  It's not the be all, end all of MCC history. I won't be given an honorary membership (hint, hint) or even a plaque on the wall there.  But I am currently satisfied that my explanation is the best out there for the land swap.

I know that statement will do nothing but spur rebuttals.  So be it. If they contain facts that we can measure, rather than assume, I, like Ross Perot, am all ears.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff,

"Creationists" have more facts on their side.

You've heard TM; do you think if we found a drawing signed by Hugh Wilson at this point that it would stop these guys?

They'd argue that it HAD to have been based on something that Barker and/or CBM showed them.

Thankfully, you have proved all of their specious theories wrong in the most indisputable of ways;  mathematically!!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

I have never discounted that they looked at Barkers' June routing as a starting point for at least some holes south of Ardmore.  We have no way of knowing if any of Barkers holes made it to the final.  But, with that parcel (even sans Dallas Estate) about 4 holes wide, I figure some corridors would be shared.

And we know that they did show their routings to CBM and get suggestions in March, so yeah, CBM did show them stuff.  But, that is all in the record.

If my theory is proven true (and, how could it not?) it does sort of limit the land swap, and thus final routing to post 11-15-1910, which pushes the final routing credit towards the committee, with an assist to CBM as always stated in the club history.  Having read the documents over all these months, I am glad to have learned more about the nature of CBM's contribution, which I didn't know 5 years ago when this started.

I know some still harbor hopes of having more documents come available, and I know some of you guys in Philly are exploring a few new avenues outside MCC records, so it may happen. 

[JESII]

Jeff,

Just because I missed a few days, I have to ask...was your math calculation based on the 11/10/1910 Land Plan?

Also, why would CBM's share of credit be impacted by the date that a Merion Committee member made his primary contribution?

One other question for anyone, did Francis say the first 13 holes were completely routed? Or did he say "they fit pretty easily"?

Thanks

[JESII]

Nope...one more...did the Wilson report say that they created 5 distinct routings AFTER their March visit to NGLA?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

Yes it was based on the November plan and the aerial photos of the final Golf House Road alignment and measurements of both.

I think CBM's share of credit will continue to be debated.  But, I think my theory makes it more likely that the routings started after the Nov 10 plan, rather than before.  Since they consulted CBM twice in Early 1911, he in the opinion of many, could probably get a wee bit more credit than MCC traditionally has.  However, that is not my call.

I haven't looked at the record concerning the NGLA trip recently. I have been told in different private emails that the 5 routings occurred before the trip and he selected one, and also after the trip and the advice he gave.  I will let someone else who really knows state that, because I have forgotten which is true.  Ditto with the Francis story. I could flip back through 57 pages, but someone else can, too. I think he said the fit pretty easily, suggesting routing occurred after the committee was formed, but not necessarily proving it all by itself. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff,

Just because I missed a few days, I have to ask...was your math calculation based on the 11/10/1910 Land Plan?

Also, why would CBM's share of credit be impacted by the date that a Merion Committee member made his primary contribution?

One other question for anyone, did Francis say the first 13 holes were completely routed? Or did he say "they fit pretty easily"?

Thanks

I'll take those two questions, Jeff.

Richard Francis said;

"The land was shaped like a capital "L" and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion - with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore Avenue - but the last five holes were another question."


The MCC Minutes said;

"Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the new land, they went down to the National Course....."

"On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans.  On April 6th Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Whigham came over and spent the day....."


p.s.   I would also concur with Jeff that CBM should get more credit than I knew prior and I credit David Moriarty and Tom MacWood for that.  

However, they just turned it into a zero-sum game where they tried to argue that CBM and/or Barker routed the course and did the hole designs for the course that opened in 1912 and that was not true.

It was based on a Literal Interp of the Francis Swap and Bryan has mathematically proven that this would not have been possible.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

You like graphics so here is the 1908 map which I believe shows what was offered and what they ended up with.  It is obviously not meant to be exact.



1. The Purple line represents the border of the land that HDC either owned or had an option on at the time they made their offer to MCC (excluding the land off the map to the north)
2. The Blue line represents the border of what I believe were the approx 100 acres that were originally offered.
3. Together, the Red and Green lines represent the borders of what was ultimately purchased by MCC.
   3.a.  The Red lines represents the portions of the border that differed from what was offered.
   3.b.  The Green lines represent the portions of the border that followed what was originally offered.

As you can see, they did NOT follow what was originally offered:

1.   Francis noted that they did not need land west of the present course so they didn't purchase it.
2.   Francis noted that they did need the 130 x 190 yard parcel west of Haverford College so they expanded their purchase up there.  
3.   M&W noted that MCC should purchase the land behind the clubhouse to use in the golf course so the secured that by lease.
4.   HDC owned or had an option on plenty of land West of the current course, but according to Francis they didn't have interest in the land west of the current golf course.  HHB,  M&W, someone else, or some combination added the Dallas Estate which was great.  

These are some of the changes to the borders made to suit the golf course.   I am not even sure why this is arguable.

Since I'm sure I'll be asked to prove how Bryan has proved that the Literal Interp of the Francis Swap (which subsequently I will simply call "LIFS" to save my fingers) is mathematically impossible, I may as well start typing now.  

I've reposted David's map where he graphically represents what he thinks happened, and it's completely dependent on LIFS because it argues that since the 1910 Land Plan has some semblance of a triangle on the northern section, Francis's idea had to happen before then, which rules out Hugh Wilson.

David postulated that Connell originally offered 100 acres, which without any historical boundary precedence, or other evidence, he places arbitrarily at the juncture of the Johnson Farm and the southern border of the Haverford College land, which conveniently includes all of the Johnson Farm land northeastern and southern sections except for the triangle.  

We've since learned that Connell never actually offered 100 acres.   He offered whatever would be required for the golf course which Merion believed in that same correspondence would be "about 120 acres".

So, the whole premise of the theory was that the 120 acres in question was made up roughly of the what David was hoping the blue lines represented;   about 99 acres of Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate.   The first problem with that theory is that once Bryan measured the metes and bounds, the area encircled in blue turned out to be 108 acres!, which added to the Dallas Estate takes us up to 129 acres, a total acreage completely out of whack with any of the documentation.


The next problem is the size of the triangle of land.    Bryan has proven that the triangle was 4.8 acres (roughly 5)  in size, which if they swapped for takes us up to roughly 134 acres under consideration, and then we have the 3 acres of RailRoad land that was used that takes us up to 137 acres total we're talking about.

So to get down to the number we know the course was actually built at, 123 acres (120 purchased, 3 leased), David's theory has to contend that they swapped FOURTEEN (14) acres to add 5, or;

108 + 21 = 129 + 3 (leased) + 5 (triangle added) =137 acres - 14 (swapped out) = 123

To have done this, they would have needed 137 acres in the first place, which no historical documentation at any time supports.

Basically, a Literal Interpretation of the Francis Swap (LIFS) that concludes they ONLY traded for the 4.8 acres of the triangle is Mathematically Impossible based on the documented historical evidence.