[Phil_the_Author]

As I mentioned in my "Dear Mr. Whitten..." topic, this thread is for those who have comments and/or questions. I will make an earnest effort to supply answers as quickly and timely as possible.

Once again, I want to thank all my fellow GCA members for respecting my wish to have a scholarly private discussion with Mr. Whitten in this public forum...

[Tim Bert]

My questions are

1) Is Ron Whitten a member of this mesage board?
2) Have you obtained some previou agreement from him to respond or if not do you have some realistic sense that he will respond?

If not, it seems the other thread might best belong in the "In My Opinion Section" particularly if you are going to keep piling on questions for him even if he doesn't respond.

[Kyle Harris]

My questions are

1) Is Ron Whitten a member of this mesage board?
2) Have you obtained some previou agreement from him to respond or if not do you have some realistic sense that he will respond?

If not, it seems the other thread might best belong in the "In My Opinion Section" particularly if you are going to keep piling on questions for him even if he doesn't respond.

Ron has an IMO piece posted.

[RJ_Daley]

Phil, something tells me that RW does read GCA.com regularly and is aware of your 'challenge'.  I think it would be very interesting to see and read both of you two gents debate the matter.  But, I fear that while you and he would have your debate in style and class, it might lead to others chiming in to the extent it could become another train wreck like ALL the Merion theads became.  Perhaps the key to a civil and enlightening debate would be simply each of you putting an essay up highlighting your positions on the matter in an "in my opinion" format, and not have any other debate from the peanut gallery, so as not to egg-on needless emotional responses. 

It is actually of greater fascination to me when observing these intense and deeply rooted in historical minutia controversies, that the human behavior of the participants and to consider the process of their emotional responses to the debate, becomes more fascinating than the subject itself. 

[Phil_the_Author]

Tim,

Ron is an official member of GCA.com as of 2/1/2002. He is considered a "Jr. Member" having made but a mere 27 posts since that time. No, there is no agreement with him. I rather expect that he is not pleasantly and collegially surprised by my challenge, but as I mentioned yo him in my personal email that sent to inform him of it, I hope he accepts it in the spirit in which it has been proferred.

RJ, thank you for the compliment, I also intend to keep it more than civil; raher collegial but spirited. Golf is a game of history; why else does the idea of Tiger Woods possibly passing Jack Nicklaus' total for majors won intrigue us so? Therefor the history of the game, its championships, players, courses and yes, its architects need to be protected and not trivialized either by a poorly thought-out theory or in an effort to sell magazines. Neither should it be defended by one who is simply trying to defend the reputation of one he is a great fan of. No, this is too serious a matter and should be done in a manner that honors both participants, subject matter and those great figures of the games glorious past.

You mentioned the Merion thread's; this will be different. That David challenged the views so long held and for Tom, Wayne, Mike and others to defend it was both proper and exciting. It was when it became personal through attacks that it suffered.

No, this can be a serious debate done well and proper and I'm hoping that Ron will strongly consider partaking in it. I also hope that those who know him will assure him of my veracity and honor as both golfer and golf architecture student and that it is time to get to the truth of this matter once and for all that I am interested in, regardless of what the outcome may be...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phil,

We'll see if Ron attends this meeting of the minds. My sense is that he does NOT read golfclubatlas.com very much. He has told me so and that he doesn't have the time.  I would say he would be very pleasant to debate this with and very professional.  While he is professional to a fault, he also remains very passionate about gca history too.

From time to time, some people on this site have questioned Ron's character or motivations now that he is a senior member of GD.  We have to recall that he was the original golf architecture researcher, way back before the internet. I have been to his house and office. I have seen his files of clippings. I have heard his near encyclopedic knowledge and memory of the research he has done, which includes talking to many descendants of old gca's and going through their personal papers.

Thus, I would hope any participants here do avoid personal attacks or innuendos on Ron or his character.  Even if we keep this as civil as a discussion can be, the questions, if not the tone may end up similar to the Merion thread.  Some of them are, IMHO:

Who, if any, has a bigger axe to grind in this discussion?  Tillie's self appointed historian or a GD writer trying to help them sell magazines?

What record is more appropriate to rely on when two old records conflict? An actual contract for services or a newspaper article?  A notice of dismissal even before the contract was finished, or Tillie's public proclamations that he was involved in one of the few great projects of the day?

Is there any more corroborating evidence, like Tillie's standard contract on other, full service projects?

Is there more substantial evidence that Tillie spent more than 15 days on site, as Phil states?  Are there any Tillie drawn plans?

While I believe Ron is right about the contracts, it certainly is not out of the question that Tillie went ahead and did a lot more work than his contract actually required, because it was a great opportunity, and frankly, it was a chance to design a golf course. At the same time, Burbeck was a strong personality and had the authority to shut Tillie down if he really wanted to.

I have absolutely no desire to fight about who should get credit or co-credit. I really don't care which way history records the creation of BP.  From my persepctive, it would be interesting to know more about how the two men worked together, just for historical accuracy and interest.  In the end, with such few facts available, we might as well agree up front that whatever comes out of this, it will still be largely an interpretation of an incomplete set of documents.

[Rick Wolffe]

Ok, I read Mr. Brauer's commentary...and I was hoping that I would not get dragged into this silliness again.

...So let me get this straight...was Tillinghast hired to perform design services for the golf courses or was he hired to do course construction?

Wasn't Clifford Wendehack hired as a consultant to perform design services on the clubhouse or was he hired to do contract construction work?

Does GD or one of its writers have the authority and project knowledge to confer title of "architect of record" for any golf project in America?  Aren't there legal regulations and professional liability issues and professional standards for design professionals, which have evolved over decades?

If the owner of the project, which is an instrumentally of the State of New York, says the original design architect of record for Bethpage Black, Red, & Blue is Tillinghast, and the original design architect of record for the clubhouse is Wendehack, then should the owner blindly revise its historical record based on a published claim made by one golf magazine with no legal standing?

[Rick Wolffe]

Oh...one other question...who should have the burden of proof on this?

Should Bethpage State Park be required to prove to Golf Digest that Tillinghast was hired to provide design services and is therefore architect of record for the original design not Burbeck, and that Burbeck was employed to supervise golf course construction and run the park as its Superintendent?

Not to digress, but why do we have knuckleheads that make claims that the US faked the Moon landings?  So if I believe these guys, the late Rear Admiral Alan Shepherd, commander of the Apollo 14, did not hit a six-iron on the Moon, but it was staged in a warehouse somewhere in Texas!  Should we be wasting taxpayer dollars addressing these knuckleheads?

[Rick Wolffe]

Ok...one last question for the practicing golf architects...

How would you feel if you were hired to provide design services for a golf course project...

and you performed such services and laidout a course and provided design documents with all course features with your ideas...

and the course was constructed by another contractor...

and after it is built you are complimented and recognized in the national media for the design work...

and decades later the son of the late Superintendent who oversaw the construction says that his Dad designed and built the course...

and that you were just someone that had a seperate consulting contract of little value...

and the bulk of the cost was in the construction contract overseen by his dad...

and his dad was there everyday while the project was constructed...

So therfore, his dad designed and built the project?


Forgive me, for another query for the practicing attorneys on this board...

Isn't heresay -  (information gathered by the first person from a second person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience) generally in addmissable evidence in courts of law?  Dosen't RW have a law degree and didn't he practice law at one time in past?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Rick,

All good questions. Frankly, on the Merion thread, I have stated that Merion has the right to attribute the design, so I guess I would have to say BP does. (That is, if I cared who got credit!)  That said, while I understand the frustrations of Merion and anyone else in having outsiders "attack" them or their histories, and consequently be put in the position of proving a negative, I think its going to happen at some point as historians keep on digging. I don't think you can stop it in a freedom of speech country that we are purported to be.

Of course, the attribution question still lives on, in different forms. In my case I see it happening two ways. First, last year I opened a golf course where the Owner paid Fred Couples to be a signature designer.  For the record, he never showed up, and I never met him. But, his name has sold a few homes.  The Owner has been quite good about crediting both of us on the scorecard but their ads tout Freddie, quite naturally.  I have heard of golfers touting how great Freddie's ideas are on this hole or another.  Others want to know "who really designed it."

On the other end of the spectrum, I have put a few former associates in business and each claims on their resumes or presentations to have been "involved with" or the "real designer of" XXX golf course.  While I can and should get the credit, they take some of it in their own marketing, etc.  Its a natural process and perhaps someday, I will write down to the best of my memory who laid out what greens and tees, who made field suggestions, and whatever just in case anyone decides they really need to know.  To answer your question, golf course attributions hasn't reached the supreme court yet, or as far as I know, any court of law other than perhaps a few isolated incidents where the gca wanted to take his name off a particular course.  And this leads to these types of debates.

As to contracts, that is a great question and one reason I asked if Tillies other contracts are out there to be reviewed. It is well known that his design style changed a lot from course to course. I know he did some of his own construction especially around NY and in other parts of the country, I believe others built his designs.  The difference in contractors IMHO (but as always I could be wrong) probably accounted for at least some of the differences in style.  In normal practice, did Tillie get a design and build contract?  Did he sign separate design and build contracts?

If his contracts were for design and build typically, and he got a consultants contract only for BP, because the construction was already being handled, I could see how Ron might have misinterpreted that, especially given how much simpler design contracts were then compared to now.  Tillie may have very well been hired to design the course, although the "Maximum of 15 days" does sound like it contains less than full responsibility for designing the course than a typical design contract of any era typically would.

As to the overall silliness, I dont' question Ron's motives, even if many disagree with him.  I would advise Tillie supporters (named or unnamed) to simply counter with as many facts as possilble, or decline the debate altogether, and avoid the name calling that started on the Merion threads, no matter how passionate they may be on the subject.  Those threads go nine pages, but with appropriate information, this thread could theoretically be over in nine posts.

[Phil_the_Author]

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for posting in this thread. I'll see if I can provide some answers...

"We'll see if Ron attends this meeting of the minds. My sense is that he does NOT read golfclubatlas.com very much. He has told me so and that he doesn't have the time.  I would say he would be very pleasant to debate this with and very professional.  While he is professional to a fault, he also remains very passionate about gca history too."

Jeff, I completely believe and agree with that.

"From time to time, some people on this site have questioned Ron's character or motivations now that he is a senior member of GD.  We have to recall that he was the original golf architecture researcher, way back before the internet. I have been to his house and office. I have seen his files of clippings. I have heard his near encyclopedic knowledge and memory of the research he has done, which includes talking to many descendants of old gca's and going through their personal papers."

Jeff, I have NEVER questioned Ron's character or motivations either here or in any other venue. I don't need to be to his house to know that he must have a large and detailed archive. Yet, you also have never been to mine and are quite unaware of just how large my own archives are. For example, I have copies articles that Tilly wrote that few, if any, have ever seen today. Just three days ago I discovered a new one written in 1915 while he was in San Antonio working on Brackenridge Park & Fort Sam Hourton. It was an article about the Philadelphia baseball team! Not a word about golf was mentioned in it. My point is that my character and motivations have been questioned at times on here and elsewhere by those who have never been to my home or seen my files. A written venue in which to publish one's opinions neither makes that person more or less honorable or his writings factual. Those are shown all on their own, and Ron is a good man with a wonderful passion for the game and its history.

"Thus, I would hope any participants here do avoid personal attacks or innuendos on Ron or his character.  Even if we keep this as civil as a discussion can be, the questions, if not the tone may end up similar to the Merion thread.  Some of them are, IMHO:"

As long as it is left up to me that will not happen.

"Who, if any, has a bigger axe to grind in this discussion?  Tillie's self appointed historian or a GD writer trying to help them sell magazines?"

I would maintain that neither of us have axes grinding away. We do have sincere belief's in what we believe are the facts surrounding the single largest individual golf course design and construction project in the history of the game. Also, EVERY person who writes a biography of a man after he has died and without ever having an opportunity to interview them is by definition self-appointed. In that sense, Ron, too, is a self-apponted historian of the game as he, too, never spoke to Joseph Burbeck.  

"What record is more appropriate to rely on when two old records conflict? An actual contract for services or a newspaper article?  A notice of dismissal even before the contract was finished, or Tillie's public proclamations that he was involved in one of the few great projects of the day?"

That is a question that is not applicable to this discussion. There is NO question as to the contract that Tilly signed or what was contained within its pages. That is not being questioned. The INTERPRETATION of what the contract specified upon those involved IS! It is because of how one INTERPRETS the contract's meaning that newspaper articles that include the facts of the job and information about those involved become quite important. You mentioned a "notice of dismissal" given to Tilly BEFORE the contract was fulfilled. Where have you seen this or how are you aware of it? In Ron's article he simply states that Tilly signed his contract on 12/30/1933 and "was laid off" on 4/18/1935. Not a word about a "letter of dismissal" from an UNFINISHED CONTRACT.

Jeff, let me ask you this, do you believe that Tilly hadn't spent at least 15 days at work at Bethpage in the 1 year, 3 months and 20 days that his contract was in effect? Actually, being "dismissed" at that point is something that will also be spoken to during whatever discussion will be had on the other thread. It is actually proof that he was there for MORE than 15 days as there would have been no need to provide a letter of dismissal other wise.

Finally, Tilly public proclaiming that HE was the architect of Bethpage is NOT to be given greater weight than an INTERPRETATION of what a contract MEANT more than 75 years after it was signed?

"Is there any more corroborating evidence, like Tillie's standard contract on other, full service projects?"

As for Tilly's standard contract, which was NEVER a FORM document of any type but rather conceived and written for the specific and individual project for which he was contracted to do, actually they all allowed for EXTRA SERVICES TO BE BILLED FOR as separate and distinct from the original contract. Have you considered that Tilly may have actually done so at Bethpage? But to answer your question, I have a number of copies of contracts that Tilly & clubs signed.

"Is there more substantial evidence that Tillie spent more than 15 days on site, as Phil states?" See above.

"Are there any Tillie drawn plans?" As of today there are almost NO known Bethpage plans. There is only a single set in the New York State Archive system that according to their records contain notes in hand-writing on it and at that it is not even in Albany. In fact, the place where it is supposed to be, and I will not mention it since they are a bit embarrassed at this point about it, have been searching for it since I ASKED THEM ABOUT IT in May 2002. They can't find it and due to this new article are making a vigorous and renewed search. Yet, despite that no one has seen it for many years, would you be surprised to learn that I mentioned this to ron in Email back in 2002 and he told me then that he had actually seen it? I bring that up because I am well aware that he has seen the set of prints kept by Burbeck's son and I am certain that he thought I was refering to that when I wasn't.

Actually, as history, Bethpage Park and the N.Y. State Parks & Recreation Dept. and all accounts of the day agree, Tilly designed Bethpage. Therefor, the question REALLY should be, are there any BURBECK drawn plans? The answer is NO. If there were, his SON WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THEM. He didn't and he can't.

"While I believe Ron is right about the contracts, it certainly is not out of the question that Tillie went ahead and did a lot more work than his contract actually required, because it was a great opportunity, and frankly, it was a chance to design a golf course. At the same time, Burbeck was a strong personality and had the authority to shut Tillie down if he really wanted to."

Ron is INCORRECT about the "contracts" (should be singular). From what basis do you believe that "BUrbeck was a strong personality?" You stated that Burbeck had the "Authority to shut Tillie down if he really wanted to..." No, he didn't. Tilly had an ENFORCABLE CONTRACT. Burbeck could not ignore that. If Tilly was there in addition to what the contract called for, then he MOST LIKELY had the authorization for doing so and so Burbeck could not just dismiss him out of hand. Even your own statement that tilly was given a "letter of dismissal shows that procedures had to be followed.

"I have absolutely no desire to fight about who should get credit or co-credit. I really don't care which way history records the creation of BP."

I have no desire to fight either. I, though, DO CARE about "which way history records the creation of BP" as the nmost important part of this entire discussion is the TRUTH! If history should simply record what people want to think has happened and pass that along then not a single person in any furture generation will be able to learn from it. No, History itself demands that the truth be recorded, rememberred and learned from.

"From my persepctive, it would be interesting to know more about how the two men worked together, just for historical accuracy and interest."

Actually Jeff, that is exactly WHY I am so passionate about this topic. In my original work and research that led to my first book, Golf for the People: Bethpage and the Black, I was stunned to learn about Joseph Burbeck and his singular importance to the ENTIRE project. It is because of the ENTIRETY of his repsonsibilities and the work that he was doing that it would haven been PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for him to have designed any of the courses, let alone the Black. But I'll go into great detail on that later. Suffice to say, I am of the opinion that Joe Burbeck has NEVER received his proper credit for his role at Bethpage and that Ron's original article has permanently damaged his reputation and how history will view him. That, too, is why i think it is vital that this be setteld.

"In the end, with such few facts available, we might as well agree up front that whatever comes out of this, it will still be largely an interpretation of an incomplete set of documents."

Jeff, you may want to agree with that, but I, for at least one, don't and won't. If Ron is able to convince me that i am incorrect i will gladly and proudly proclaim it, but it will not be based upon an "interpretation" that it happens. Likewise, if I maintain that it was Tilly it will also be based upon what I feel is absolute proof.

In May of 2002, from my perspective 3 things happened in this order:
1- My history of Bethpage was released by my publisher.
2- Ron & Golf Digest published the original article.
3- I received numerous calls from Architects, the management of Bethpage State Park and some from within the USGA, all asking me what information I had that would/could dispute this claim.

I didn't simply say that Ron & GD were wrong and here is what i have; rather, I went to New York the following day and spent an intensive 4 days of research at various archives and locations researching the question as one who was doing so for the first time. All the monies for this came from my own pocket. I mention that because I want you to understand the level of commitment and passion I have to the truth of history. I didn't do it because Tilly's my guy or some other nonsense as has been labelled of me, but because I simply want the truth. BOTH Tilly & Burbeck deserve it and deserve the credit for the amazing things they each accomplished.

The result of that trip? A "white paper" that is on the Tillinghast Association website (written before the Association made me their historian... that one wasn't self-appointed  ... heck, I wasn't even a member of GCA nor even had heard of it at that time) and used by others mentioned above to refute their claim.

I can absolutely state without any question that there isn't another person who has researched this question more fully and at more places than myself. That fact DOESN'T mean that my conclusions are correct; it DOES give a bit more weight to them than the average fan of golf course architecture.

Finally, I'll be up in New York for the entire week and more of the Open. I have already made plans to spend a day going through documents at the Robert Moses Archives storage facility where EVERYTHING he was ever invovled with is stored away waiting to be found. As far as I know, I am the ONLY golf course historian to have done so. The full records of the Long Island State Parks Commission and the Bethpage Park Authority (the two agency's under which the park and the golf courses were built) are there. Finding them is another story entirely...

[Rick Wolffe]

Hi Jeff

From what I have seen of Tillinghast's written contracts and newspaper clippings, Tillinghast primary business focus was the profession of a planning & design, perhaps run like a modern design studio today...contrast this to our understanding of how Donald Ross worked -- where his firm performed the all the design and all the construction work -- I wonder if he took an approach that he got all the work and shared it with none.

We know that Tillinghast worked with multiple engineering & construction firms.  He advertised and held himself out as purely a golf course designer/architect, not a constructer.  Some noted golf historians, like Frank Hannigan and Geoffry Cornish, have given Tilly significant credit for helping to elevate golf course architecture into a defined profession.

The Tillinghast web site has some good examples of the means and methods of Tillinghast's design business.  Here are a few,

* At Baltimore CC, the club contracted directly with him for planning and design work and on-site inspection of work-in-progress.  The engineering, construction and other new course construction work was directly contracted by Baltimore with other contractors.

* At Lakewood CC, a local Landscape Architecture and Planning Firm was the General Contractor, and Tillinghast was the sub-contractor soley for design work.

* At Binghamton, Tillinghast was retained for site selection, planning and course design.  The rest of the engineering and construction went directly to other contractors.

This leads me to another question...or field for additional research...you noted how the construction firm can insert much on the "style" of the "as built" project...it would be neat to identify the many contractors that built the courses for Tillinghast and the other golden age designers. 

The field of golf course architecture and construction has grown into a cottage industry today.  Back in Tilly's day it was quite tiny, and demand for good construction teams may have been quite tight.

I have a good hunch and some evidence that Tilly employed Flynn, Banks and several other well known Architects/Constructers for some of his design work...perhaps some surprises will come to light in near future...with unrefutable documentation!

[Mike_Cirba]

Phil,

I'm sure you already know this, but I thought it noteworthy to add to the discussion the following from "Fifty Years of American Golf" by H.B. Martin, 1936;

For eleven years in succession a major championship has been played over a Tillinghast links.  This is a distinct compliment to Arthur W. Tillinghast who has been actively engaged in designing courses for more than thirty years.  Some of the famous layouts including Baltusrol, where the national open was recently held, the Winged Foot Country Club, the Five Farms Course of the Baltimore Country CLub, Ridgewood Country CLub, where recent Ryder Cup matches were held, Fresh Meadow at Flushing, L.I., Shawnee in Pennsylvania, and the new Bethpage courses on Long Island where the public links championship was held."

"Tilly is rather proud of his work at Bethpage, where there are four courses included in the planning.   The planning and building of the courses was done for the New York State Park Commission and comprises a tract of land of 1300 acres.  The Tillinghast type of green has become famous in this country and is easily recognize, inasmuch as it is small and closely trapped around the entrance.   THis style has been copied quite extensively abroad."

"In the fall of '35 Tillinghast was appointed official golf course consultant and adviser for the Professional Golfers' Association.  He is happy in this line of endeavor, as he is constantly on he move and inspecting courses from Maine to California, making suggestions or adding traps and taking out bunkers here and there as the case may be.   Addressing greenkeepers and club committees is another feature of his work.   As one of he early amateur golfes of this country Tilly played in many championships, representing Philadelphia where he was born and raised."


From the research some of us have done recently around Cobb's Creek, I can attest to how confusing some of this becomes when government of any type is involved.

For instance, the signed name on the 1915 Topographical Map showing the original layout of Cobb's Creek is one Jesse T. Vogdes, who was Chief Engineer of the Fairmount Park system at the time.   A later map shows the signature of Alan Corson, who was Vogdes asst., and then went on to become Chief Engineer himself before 1920 until after 1940.

Did Vogdes and/or Corson design Cobb's Creek?   No, of course not, but in their respective appointed governmental roles they had final signoff on the plans.

In the case of Cobb's Creek, a committee of Presidents of some of the prominent Golf Association of Philadelphia clubs;

Robert Lesley of Merion
Ellis Gimbel of Philmont
Clarence Geist of Whitemarsh Valley
Colonel Edward Morrell of Philadelphia Country Club
John Pepper of Huntingdon Valley Country Club

were the drivers and visionairies who first appointed a committee in 1913 to locate a suitable site within the city park system to locate the city's first public course.   The men of the committee who found the Cobb's Creek site were;

Hugh Wilson of Merion
George Crump of Pine Valley
A.H. "Ab" Smith of Huntingdon Valley
Joseph Slattery of Whitemarsh Valley

After the site was selected, another committee was appointed to design and layout and construct a course for the Park Commissioners.   All of these men had prior golf course design and construction experience and included;

Hugh Wilson of Merion
George Crump of Pine Vallley
A.H. "Ab" Smith of Huntingdon Valley
George Klauder of Aronimink
J. Franklin Meehan of North Hills

We also know from George Thomas's book that he was onsite during the process and claims to have learned a lot from Wilson, and we also know that Walter Travis offered assistance in the latter parts of the construction process.

During the construction process, most accounts credited Wilson (six months onsite), Smith, and Klauder as the primary architects and overseers until opening.

However, because the project was on city land, it had to also follow the proper approval chains so you end up with a design map with the name Jesse T. Vogdes.

Someday in the future, someone locating that map without knowing any of the hundreds of contemporaneous articles uncovered during our process (mostly by Indiana Joe Bausch)  that tell the whole, true story, will believe erroneously that Jesse T. Vogdes was the architect of Cobb's Creek.

It's also we we wrote a book to detail the true story.

[Sam Maryland]

Maybe another golf publication would be interested in reporting on the "Dear Mr. Whitten" thread, seems like a good story on it's own.

Now I'm going to seach for threads on the Blue to find out which of the holes are original and which are not.  Was out there yesterday, all the courses are in pretty darn good shape.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Rick,

Thanks for that info. The variation in contracts and the info Phillip supplied above about most being individualized letter contracts initially suggest to me that Ron Whitten may have mistinterpreted the wording, at least somewhat.  Tillie may have been very comfortable designing a cousre even though being named a "consultant" in words only.  But, its all interpretation again.

It wouldn't surprise me that on some jobs Tilly employed other gca's construction crews if he didn't have his own.  Why not use the most experienced people out there.  That said, I have always wondered how Tilly could do pretty plain bunkers at Golden Valley a year or two after the masterpiece bunkers were built at SFGC (and if Billy Bell or the guy who taught Billy Bell about bunkers) was his bunker work guy at SFGC vs some local guys at Golden Valley with less experience?

Phil,

Many apologies if my words defending Ron's character came off in any way as questioning yours.  I certainly didn't mean that, nor did I mean to imply you would be in any way unprofessional in a debate with Ron. I also know you have lots of Tillie material, take it seriously and passionately, and have contributed to golf architecture history. I am still considering whether to go to BP for the Open and will try to contact you if I do. I would love to discuss the whole thing further.

I also mean no offense when I say it will be a matter of interpretation.  Its just that so much of history is interpretation.  Look at how many schoolbooks have been changed now that our sensitivity to the Native Americans, Japanese, or whoever has heightened from when I was a kid and it was a simple matter of "good guy-bad guy'.  I have no doubt that the newer histories are more nuanced, etc. but they always seem to have some political bias or another - its always there, but one is replaced with another.  As a result of those personal views, I doubt I would ever be able to say either you or Ron was the unquestioned winner and champ of the ultimate truth debate!  Hence, the "ax to grind" comment, but its no reflection on either you or Ron, just of my cynicism.

And, with no disrespect intended, I doubt many would be convinced by a statement that being laid off early was a clear sign that he was there more than his contract stipulated.  How?  While I have no right to demand anything of anyone, I know that in that approximate time frame, he kept a ledger of his trips for the PGA. I would suspect that it would be easy enough (check that, possible with great effort!) to show interested parties how he filled in his days much like Sean Tully is trying to do with Mac and Brad Klien did with Ross (in one case to prove he couldn't have designed Topeka CC unless he was kidnapped off a train)  Maybe you have done that and it is what your refer to that will be posted in the other thread. 

If these threads go forward, it seems like you want to have them centered on that kind of documentation, rather than arguments based on parsing words (such as me typing "dismissed" when Ron's article said "laid off") which in the end probably don't really mean as much  as actual documents and time lines. 

I do agree that in the normal situation, a guy like Burbeck would have too much to do to worry about designing a course or 4 at BP.  That said, he was a scratch golfer and I have seen cases of important men making special exceptions to what should be their job responsibilities to be more involved with the design of a golf course, espectially one that he envisioned as the public Pine Valley. At the same time, I know of many in charge who would love to take the credit while others actually did the work.  I don't know that he did either of the above, but I wouldn't rule either out, based on what I know. 

Of course, that means nothing. I trust that with all your research, you know far more than I.  Those of us interested in history casually (not spending any more time on it than reading it on golf club atlas.com) simply benefit from those of you willing to do the research.  While I don't mind a spirited debate, I do want you to know I appreciate your work. As I mentioned on the Merion threads, I do some research in other areas and know it can be fun and frustrating at the same time.  I hope all of your work leads to a greater understanding of what actually happened. 

Knowing that, I would be just as happy to have it remain a credited Tilly course, because as Rick says, there are always many involved in the creation of a course. If I, as head gca, was involved, I would probably want the credit as described in my previous post.  It just doesn't always happen!  The whole design attribution concept is one that a lot of people debate.  They haven't come to any conclusions yet, though.

[Phil_the_Author]

Jeff,

No need to apologize as no offense was taken.

A few thoughts on what you wrote. "And, with no disrespect intended, I doubt many would be convinced by a statement that being laid off early was a clear sign that he was there more than his contract stipulated.  How?  While I have no right to demand anything of anyone, I know that in that approximate time frame, he kept a ledger of his trips for the PGA. I would suspect that it would be easy enough (check that, possible with great effort!) to show interested parties how he filled in his days much like Sean Tully is trying to do with Mac and Brad Klien did with Ross (in one case to prove he couldn't have designed Topeka CC unless he was kidnapped off a train)  Maybe you have done that and it is what your refer to that will be posted in the other thread..."

Actually yes, I have been working on a day-by-day history of what Tilly did and where from the mid-1800's to his death in May of 1942 for quite a while now. The reason for this is an attempt to identify those courses he worked on and when, especially the ones that no one has yet recognized as his. In addition, where he was not the architect, then his name needs removal from whatever listing credits him. That has already happened with a course that both the Tillinghast Association AND Ron Whitten have long credited Tilly with.

As for his day-to-day itinery while on the PGA Course Consultation Tour, that has already been published and can be found in the book Tillinghast: Creator of Golf Courses. Of note is that Tilly began this in mid-August of 1935, more than 4 months after his contract with Bethpage was finished.

As for Mr. Burbeck's ability to design the Black and the other courses, as I will shortly post on the other thread it would have been a practical impossibility for him to do so when you consider EVERYTHING that he was overseeing at the time. For example, the hiring and day-to-day duties of 1,800 WPA workers. As one who has had the job of overseeing a number of employees on a golf course construction job, can you imagine how busy he must have been managing that many people if that was the ONLY thing he was doing? That is why when I list all of his duties I believe you will have a new-found respect for the momumental job that he did actually do and how this issue and controversy takes away from and diminshes his legacy.

Sam, you won't be able to find anything written that details the holes from the original Blue course that remain. I can tell you that about a dozen are there, though in some cases partially changed and are spread out evenly between the new Blue & Yellow courses. There will be a section that details that in my next Tilly book...

[Sam Maryland]

Phil,

Which current holes on Blue and Yellow were part of the original Blue course? 

Thank you.

[Phil_the_Author]

Sam,

That's a great question requiring a complicated answer that would be too long at the moment. I promise I will post that info soon.

An example of why it is complicated... The 5th hole of the original Blue course was the only par-4 Reef hole that Tilly ever designed. It was 300 yards, and in addition to the "Reef" feature it also had a largish drainage pond on the left side that was very much in play. The hole today remains now as the 12th hole of the Yellow course with the green complex and tee virtually untouched except by poor maintenance. Unfortunately both the pond and the "Reef" are gone. So in one sense the hole is there yet in another it is gone...

Most of the original holes left suffer in the same way.

[Sam Maryland]

Awesome, I look forward to your post on the subject. 

I've been looking at the courses on google maps trying to make an educated guess (actually, an uneducated guess, played the Blue a fair number of times but never played the Yellow) at the original routing but it's tough to tell.  Just from playing the course was thinking 15 and 16 on current-Blue are original, wondered about 12-13-14?  Also wondered about 7 and 8 (current Blue)...and 6?

Anyway, tx again, will wait for your thoughts on the topic.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()