News:

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


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #275 on: June 04, 2009, 04:33:06 PM »
Mike,

So I guess that what you are saying is"

1.  The basis for dismissing Barker is a one day player was his prospective routing at Merion, and that alone.  By the way, what makes you think that this was all Barker planned on doing at Merion?

2.  You just made up the part about the $ 25 dollar figure.

3.  Your only other support was an article that did not even mention Barker, but did mention Oregon so you figure it must have been him?

Thanks.   
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)

Mike_Cirba

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #276 on: June 04, 2009, 04:49:37 PM »
David,

I know Tom MacWood desperately wants to get into a Barker throwdown with me with you as his proxy, but at this point, unless he has some definite proof that Barker had more involvement at Merion than his same day service routing performed for Connell in June 1910, its probably not a productive avenue of discussion for either of us.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2009, 08:52:16 PM by MCirba »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #277 on: June 04, 2009, 05:35:30 PM »
Mike,

Not trying to get in a throwdown,  I just wanted to confirm that your endless statements denigrating Barker were as baseless as I thought they were.  You confirmed, so Thanks.     Let's move on. 
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)

Patrick_Mucci

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #278 on: June 04, 2009, 07:47:32 PM »
Patrick

Thanks for that. In my defence I should say I'm not totally ignorant on american golf and not only do I have Scotlands Gift but I've actually read it as well ! Seriously, I am aware of MacDonalds standing then and now.

My response was not intended to suggest that MacDonald had anything to prove but was pointing out the timing in response to you suggestion that the committee were going to have a look at previous work of the guy who they had asked to desgn there course.

The time to view the great holes imported from the UK and refined in the U.S. was prior to the design and constuction of Merion, not afterwards.


With regards the land swap happening before Wilson involvement, you suggest that I have to agree with David that the course must have been routed by someone else.

Correct.


The land may have been swapped because someone did a routing that included the swapped land,

Which means that Wilson didn't route and design the golf course.


it may also have been for agronomy reasons ie poor drainage, or for development purposes etc.
There are a variety of potential reasons of which a prior routing of the course is one.

Knowing the land, I would tend to disagree.


I don't know the land and therefore don't know which of the above is likely to be valid but let me ask this question,
do you need to do a full routing to get an idea that a parcel of ground big enough to form part of a course might be better adapted for golf than a similarly sized parcel elsewhere ?

I believe you do, for without a full 18 hole routing, how can you judge whether or not the land can adequately accomodate a superior 18 hole golf course ?


The land swap may give a pointer or a hint to support Davids theory (or then again maybe it doesn't) but I respectively suggest that it doesn't provide proof.

But, it DOES.

If Wilson doesn't get involved until April of 1911 and the land swap to accomodate the routing took place in 1910 or earlier, then Wilson COULDN"T have routed and designed the golf course.



TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #279 on: June 04, 2009, 08:06:15 PM »
"With regards the land swap happening before Wilson involvement, you suggest that I have to agree with David that the course must have been routed by someone else.

Correct.

The land may have been swapped because someone did a routing that included the swapped land,

Which means that Wilson didn't route and design the golf course."



Niall:

That is just so not correct that you have to or should agree with David Moriarty's (or Pat Mucci's) theory (which is total speculation) that Merion East was routed by someone other than Wilson and his committee.

I mean there is no question at all that there was a early routing done on some of the same land by HH Barker. But he did that for someone else very early on---ie the real estate developer who was trying to promote the sale of his land and even though MCC mentioned Barker's "sketch" or "stick" routing there was never another mention again of Barker, using him, paying him (which they certainly never did do) or even paying the slightest attention to anything he did for Connell.

As for a routing or design from Macdonald, even if MCC had asked him to do something like that which it is really obvious they never did do for all kinds or reasons the fact is he did not have the time or the wherewithal to do that in 1910 and his letter to Lloyd in June 1910 makes the reasons why abundantly clear. the other parts of Francis's story logically deny Moriarty's and Mucci's interpretation of what that one part means but do you think they are interested in allowing those other parts of his story into this discussion for analysis of the whole mean of what his idea was and when? Of course not---they try to keep those other parts out of an analysis of Francis's entire story like the plague. Why do you suppose THAT is?  ;)

People like Moriaty and Mucci are just making this stuff up out of complete thin air probably because they think it makes for interesting arguing for people sem-familiar with this entire subject; there is nothing at all factual to suggest such a thing except unfortunately a very unclearly worded description of one part of Francis' story that Moriarty claims has only a single way in which it can be interpreted---eg Moriarty's way.

That is simply not the case; there are other ways to interpret what Francis meant and meant to say and the FACTS coming FROM MCC back then that neither of those two were aware of BEFORE this essay totally support another interpretation of what Francis said in that part of his thirty nine years "after the fact" story!
« Last Edit: June 04, 2009, 10:25:06 PM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #280 on: June 04, 2009, 10:31:52 PM »

"With regards the land swap happening before Wilson involvement, you suggest that I have to agree with David that the course must have been routed by someone else.

Correct.

The land may have been swapped because someone did a routing that included the swapped land,
Which means that Wilson didn't route and design the golf course."

Niall:

That is just so not correct that you have to or should agree with David Moriarty's (or Pat Mucci's) theory (which is total speculation) that Merion East was routed by someone other than Wilson and his committee.

TEPaul, I have no theory and my comments have NOTHING to do with who may have routed the golf course.
My comment has to do with but one factor, LOGIC.  If the land swap occured prior to Wilson coming on Board, then the routing that made the land swap necessary HAD to be done by someone other than WILSON, since he wasn't involved.

You're too caught up in the particulars to understand the basic logic behind my comment.


I mean there is no question at all that there was a early routing done on some of the same land by HH Barker. But he did that for someone else very early on---ie the real estate developer who was trying to promote the sale of his land and even though MCC mentioned Barker's "sketch" or "stick" routing there was never another mention again of Barker, using him, paying him (which they certainly never did do) or even paying the slightest attention to anything he did for Connell.

Again, my comment has NOTHING to do with BARKER, it has to do with the an exercise in logic that by default excludes Wilson from being involved with the routing that was made possible by the land swap.   Do you understand that ?


As for a routing or design from Macdonald, even if MCC had asked him to do something like that which it is really obvious they never did do for all kinds or reasons the fact is he did not have the time or the wherewithal to do that in 1910 and his letter to Lloyd in June 1910 makes the reasons why abundantly clear.

the other parts of Francis's story logically deny Moriarty's and Mucci's interpretation of what that one part means

Again, you're incorrect regarding my position, I have NOT offered an interpretation, nor have I indicated who routed the golf course.

I have stated that IF Wilson was not involved until AFTER the land swap, then he could NOT have been involved in the routing that was only possible if there was a land swap.

Tell me that you understand that.


but do you think they are interested in allowing those other parts of his story into this discussion for analysis of the whole mean of what his idea was and when?

Unlike you and others, I'd prefer to examine one facet at a time.
And, at this time, the facet I'm interested in is the timing of the land swap and Wilson's initial involvement at Merion.
The timing of the two events is a critical component in trying to figure out what happened.


Of course not---they try to keep those other parts out of an analysis of Francis's entire story like the plague. Why do you suppose THAT is?  ;)
That's not true.
I believe Sully asked you and/or Cirba about the 15th green and 16th tee, and I don't seem to recall that question being addressed, let alone answered by you or Mike.  Why do you think that is ?  ;D


People like Moriaty and Mucci are just making this stuff up out of complete thin air probably because they think it makes for an interesting arguing for people sem-familiar with this entire subject; there is nothing at all factual to suggest such a thing except unfortunately a very unclearly worded description of one part of Francis' story that Moriarty claims has only a single way in which it can be interpreted---eg Moriarty's way.


Your reading comprehension skills are sorely lacking.
I've made NOTHING up.
I stated, the following, which is nothing more than an exercise in LOGIC.
IF Wilson's involvement doesn't occur until early 1911  and the land swap to accomodate the five remaining holes took place PRIOR to early 1911, then WILSON COULDN'T have provided the routing for Merion.

There is NO other conclusion regarding Wilson.
DO you admit to that ?
If NOT, could you explain how someone not involved until early 1911 could have provided a routing in 1910 before he was involved ?


That is simply not the case; there are other ways to interpret what Francis meant and meant to say and the FACTS coming FROM MCC back then that neither of those two were aware of BEFORE this essay totally support another interpretation of what Francis said in that part of his thirty nine years "after the fact" story!

This has little to do with how you or anyone else interprets what Francis said.
It has to do with deductive reasoning, PURE LOGIC.

IF Wilson isn't involved until early 1911 and the land swap to accomodate the remaining five holes was done in 1910, then Wilson COULDN'T have been involved with the routing.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THE ABOVE STATEMENT AND CONCLUSION ? 
"YES" OR "NO"



TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #281 on: June 04, 2009, 10:45:30 PM »
"My comment has to do with but one factor, LOGIC."


Patrick:

With your total lack of familiarity with and understanding of the actual facts from MCC's own records on this one your "LOGIC" has absolutely NO merit whatsoever! Neither your logic nor your opinions on here without a far more comprehensive familiarity than you have with all the details of Merion's internal history which you in no way have does not amount to a hill of beans and it never will.

TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #282 on: June 04, 2009, 10:55:33 PM »
"Again, my comment has NOTHING to do with BARKER, it has to do with the an exercise in logic that by default excludes Wilson from being involved with the routing that was made possible by the land swap.   Do you understand that ?"


What I understand is your total lack of familiarity with the facts of that time at Merion. What excludes Wilson from being involved and what includes Francis from being involved in 1910? I'm talking FACTS here! You like FACTS don't you? Show me ANY FACTS that Francis was involved with Merion in 1910. Come on Pat, everybody's tired of your petty little argumentative word games. This time put up with some FACTS (and not just your north jersey "logic" :) ) or shut up!  ::)

TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #283 on: June 04, 2009, 11:05:19 PM »
"I have stated that IF Wilson was not involved until AFTER the land swap, then he could NOT have been involved in the routing that was only possible if there was a land swap.

Tell me that you understand that."



What I understand Patrick is that is a mighty BIG IF!!! What does that have to do with history of Merion East and who designed it? IF you want to know that you need to spend a ton more time on it than you have or Moriarty has.

That IF you mentioned in that statement above has nothing to do with the history of Merion or its architect, it only has to do with the penchant of people on here like you and Moriarty to think you have some license to continue to argue with people which appears to be your real interest over which golf course architecture and its history takes a very distinct backseat!


Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #284 on: June 05, 2009, 06:37:08 AM »
Patrick

Thanks for that. In my defence I should say I'm not totally ignorant on american golf and not only do I have Scotlands Gift but I've actually read it as well ! Seriously, I am aware of MacDonalds standing then and now.

My response was not intended to suggest that MacDonald had anything to prove but was pointing out the timing in response to you suggestion that the committee were going to have a look at previous work of the guy who they had asked to desgn there course.

The time to view the great holes imported from the UK and refined in the U.S. was prior to the design and constuction of Merion, not afterwards.


With regards the land swap happening before Wilson involvement, you suggest that I have to agree with David that the course must have been routed by someone else.

Correct.


The land may have been swapped because someone did a routing that included the swapped land,

Which means that Wilson didn't route and design the golf course.


it may also have been for agronomy reasons ie poor drainage, or for development purposes etc.
There are a variety of potential reasons of which a prior routing of the course is one.

Knowing the land, I would tend to disagree.


I don't know the land and therefore don't know which of the above is likely to be valid but let me ask this question,
do you need to do a full routing to get an idea that a parcel of ground big enough to form part of a course might be better adapted for golf than a similarly sized parcel elsewhere ?

I believe you do, for without a full 18 hole routing, how can you judge whether or not the land can adequately accomodate a superior 18 hole golf course ?


The land swap may give a pointer or a hint to support Davids theory (or then again maybe it doesn't) but I respectively suggest that it doesn't provide proof.

But, it DOES.

If Wilson doesn't get involved until April of 1911 and the land swap to accomodate the routing took place in 1910 or earlier, then Wilson COULDN"T have routed and designed the golf course.



Patrick

Is there any correspondence/minutes which mention the land swap and give the reasons for it ? If I have missed it I apologise but without supporting docuumentation for the reasons land swap I think it would be a stretch to contend that the landswap in itself was proof that a routing had been done to accommodate it.

Also if the routing was done as you say, wasn't it done a bit premature given the committees subsequent visit to NGLA and the 5 plans that the committee came up with prior to the NGLA visit ? I'm struggling a bit here with the timeline and the logic, again I might have missed something.

As an aside, I would be interested to hear an architects thoughts on your comments that you would need to do a full 18 hole routing to determine whether you could get a superior 18 hole golf course on a site. My guess is that not necessarily but interested to hear the experts views.

Niall

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #285 on: June 05, 2009, 06:59:03 AM »
Niall,

I'm not sure I understand your last post to me.  If you don't want to call what they were doing "design" then that is fine with me.    I am more concerned with figuring out how they influenced the course.  

In this regard, and again purely hypothetical as to the specifics, I think that CBM and Whigham were communicating to the Committee such things as
 - a redan green would work perfectly on that plateau against that old barn, and if you tear out the barn you've got a perfect redan bunker already built. As you will see tomorrow, angle is important so you need to put the tee over on the hillside next to the tee for the . . ."
 - or,  you guys really ought to secure that land behind the clubhouse, because you need a long dogleg hole and this would be a good place for one.  Plus, further on, the curve of the stream creates a very good place for a Do-or-Die plateau green appropriate for a short hole of only about 130 yards.  Tomorrow I will show you what I mean; mine is surrounded by sand and you should put sand on the 4th side of yours, but as for the creek f it you should take what nature was kind enough to give you.

etc.  

Given all the factors I listed above, and given the course the committee built, I think it is untenable that the communication is any more general than the type described above, whether it be in person, in writing, or in plan.  It may or may not have been more specific, but I don't think there was any way it would have been more general than this.

Understand what I am trying to say?  

Thanks David, I follow exactly what you say. You are saying that M&W designed or at least partially designed Merion, that is "design" as per my definition. I think where we are still at odds is whether or not you have proved that M&W did design/partially design Merion. I find your theory intriguing but I think you fall short of proving it. For one thing I think I'm right in saying Merions records/minutes give Wilson et al credit, as do contemporary accounts. Secondly it is the absence of documentary evidence of specific M&W input that I find strange. I'm thinking here that there would have been correspondence/plans on record, mention in minutes of committee meetings etc. The only correspondence from MacDonald that I have seen unfortunately doesn't help your case as it deals with general principles on hole lengths and further advice on where to go for agronomy advice, none of which gives me the impression that M&W were getting involved in the detail.

I could be wrong and would be interested in seeing any other documentation which comes to light.

Niall   

TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #286 on: June 05, 2009, 08:22:52 AM »
"I could be wrong and would be interested in seeing any other documentation which comes to light."


Niall:


So would I but the fact is there isn't any more documentation regarding Macdonald/Whigam's part. Look again at that part of your post above that is from Moriarty. He states before he lists some hypothetical communication between Macdonald/Whigam that it's hypothetical (made up, conjectural and speculative). At the end of it he states that given the above factors he thinks it is untenable that the communication between Macdonald/Whigam could have been more general than that! Untenable that their communication could have been more general THAN WHAT? Clearly nothing more than SOME HYPOTHETICAL COMMUNICATION between M/W and Wilson et al CONCOCTED by David Moriarty.

This is the very same manner and technique that he used to concoct and construct his essay "The Missing Faces of Merion." There is no factual support at all in what he did and what he used to concoct his premises and his contentions about a greater part for M/W and a lesser one for Wilson and his committee. It is all just more of that same kind of purely hypothetical and speculative CONCOCTION you see in your post above and therefore without any value to the architectural history of the golf course.

However, in this whole year long discussion there is one very important document that resurfaced after this essay and after residing seemingly unseen in the attic of MCC and apparently unconsidered for perhaps close to a century and that is that Wilson report to the board meeting of 4/19/1911. This is a document that it appears Merion's history books never used or considered (perhaps Merion's history writers understood full well there was never any reason OR need to keep supporting and reconfirming what they all knew Wilson and his committee did anyway ;) ) and it definitely hugely strengthens OUR understanding of what Wilson and his committee really did do in the winter and spring of 1911 as far as routing and designing what would later become Merion East!
« Last Edit: June 05, 2009, 08:36:26 AM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #287 on: June 05, 2009, 08:24:41 AM »
"My comment has to do with but one factor, LOGIC."


Patrick:

With your total lack of familiarity with and understanding of the actual facts from MCC's own records on this one your "LOGIC" has absolutely NO merit whatsoever! Neither your logic nor your opinions on here without a far more comprehensive familiarity than you have with all the details of Merion's internal history which you in no way have does not amount to a hill of beans and it never will.


Unfortunately, I haven't seen many FACTS produced on this thread.

The logic is irrefutable.

The ONLY thing missing is the FACTS.

The documented date of the land swap and the documented date of Wilson's involvement will allow one to draw a prudent conclusion.
All your posturing is merely ambiant noise and worthless.

As to producing the facts, you can prove your sincerity in your quest for the facts by providing Bryan with the Metes and Bounds

Those two facts/dates would determine whether Wilson would be excluded as a router of the golf course

Patrick_Mucci

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #288 on: June 05, 2009, 08:34:24 AM »
"I have stated that IF Wilson was not involved until AFTER the land swap, then he could NOT have been involved in the routing that was only possible if there was a land swap.

Tell me that you understand that."

What I understand Patrick is that is a mighty BIG IF!!!

We KNOW that.
But, that's a linchpin issue.


What does that have to do with history of Merion East and who designed it?

Tell me that you're kidding,......... please.

It could tell us who DIDN'T route Merion.


IF you want to know that you need to spend a ton more time on it than you have or Moriarty has.

No I don't.
I just need to have the documented dates provided and pure logic does the rest.
It's not rocket science, it's simple deductive logic


That IF you mentioned in that statement above has nothing to do with the history of Merion or its architect,
Of course it does.  It has everything to do with who DIDN'T route Merion, ergo, Merion's History.
You're just in DENIAL.


it only has to do with the penchant of people on here like you and Moriarty to think you have some license to continue to argue with people which appears to be your real interest over which golf course architecture and its history takes a very distinct backseat!

TE, you're so blilnded in your attempt to ardently defend the accepted history of Merion, which has proven to be flawed in some areas, that you can't accept the relevance of documenting the two dates and the logic that follows.  OPEN your eyes, and your mind MAY follow.



Mike_Cirba

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #289 on: June 05, 2009, 08:35:34 AM »
Tom,

What was your recent realization about the Macdonald letter you've mentioned recently?

TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #290 on: June 05, 2009, 08:45:14 AM »
"The documented date of the land swap and the documented date of Wilson's involvement will allow one to draw a prudent conclusion."


Patrick:

What is the documented date of the land swap?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #291 on: June 05, 2009, 08:52:31 AM »

Patrick

Is there any correspondence/minutes which mention the land swap and give the reasons for it ? If I have missed it I apologise but without supporting docuumentation for the reasons land swap I think it would be a stretch to contend that the landswap in itself was proof that a routing had been done to accommodate it.

Niall, I may have missed it too, but, I don't recall seeing any supporting documentation.

I disagree with you with respect to the reasons for the land swap, especially if 13 holes had already been configured/routed.
If you routed 13 holes why wouldn't you route the remaining 5 ?
Unless the land available wouldn't accomodate them.
Enter the swap.


Also if the routing was done as you say, wasn't it done a bit premature given the committees subsequent visit to NGLA and the 5 plans that the committee came up with prior to the NGLA visit ?

Not at all, and the perfect example of this exercise is none other than TEPaul himself.
TEPaul's club, Gulph Mills, was considering a move.
TEPaul was familiar with some land, I believe it was Androsian Farms.
TEPaul and/or C&C were involved in routing a new course before they even took title to the land.

So, to answer your question, it's not unusual at all.
NGLA did it only a few years prior to Merion.


I'm struggling a bit here with the timeline and the logic, again I might have missed something.

If a gang draws up plans to rob a bank on 03-01-08 and you first meet and join the gang on 02-01-09, you couldn't have been involved in drawing up plans to rob that bank.  Any attempt by the authorities to prosecute you for that aspect of the crime would fail on the timing of the dates of the plans and the date you first became involved.  The dates and LOGIC would provide your alibi, ergo, not guilty, unless you were O.J. ;D


As an aside, I would be interested to hear an architects thoughts on your comments that you would need to do a full 18 hole routing to determine whether you could get a superior 18 hole golf course on a site. My guess is that not necessarily but interested to hear the experts views.

Why would you think NOT ?

If you have 13 good holes, but can't get in the last 5, you don't have a golf course.
You don't need an expert to tell you that.

Your question has to be answered in the context of the available land and it's quality.
With a good 2,000 acres third graders can come up with a routing with no holes predetermined.
But, with limited and/or unusually configured or unusually topoed land, the process becomes far more difficult.
Unless of course, you feel that these novices put together a superior course without any consideration of the entire 18.
The committee members certainly weren't experts, were they ?



TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #292 on: June 05, 2009, 10:41:28 AM »
"Tom,
What was your recent realization about the Macdonald letter you've mentioned recently?"



Michael Frobusher Cirba;

My recent realization follows and it proves beyond a reasonable doubt what an "expert researcher/gca historical analyst" I am! 


Very recently an old Philadelphia newspaper article or two was uncovered somewhere out in the hinterlands! It was shown to Merion asking for its help and advice as to what it may mean. The newspaper articles chronicled a list of real estate transfers back in 1909 in the Main Line.

One of those land transfers appears to have been for a 130 acre piece somewhere overlooking the Schuykill River. It appears that land may've been purchased by our Robert Lesley of all people, the chairman of our MCC new golf grounds search committee. Later Lesley writes of a piece of ground somewhere north of "the road" that was an alternative site for MCC's interest in the land that is now Merion East! As we know the Lesley report to the MCC board on July 1, 1910 mentions other or another alternative site to Ardmore.

WEELLL, inquiring minds would like to know where that alternative site may have been!!! Perhaps inquiring minds would like to know where it is so, among other things, we could have about 17 threads of 39 pages each discussing and debating if MCC made the right choice on land and what MERION EAST would've been like had that alternative site been chosen over Ardmore!

Not a bad thought and question actually for us Uber GCA history geeks that number 117 the world over but may increase to 120.1 when we actually formally approve an increase of an additional three Uber-GCA history geeks via a formal GOLFCLUBATLAS.com board of governors motion known as the Morrissett Resolution!!

So, for my recent immaculate realization and revelation;

Charlie M and Whig-for-Brains were taking the early morning train from New York to Philadelphia on June 23, 1910 to meet the MCC search committee at the invitation of Rodman E. Griscom. The plan apparently was to meet at the Ardmore site in the late a.m. check out its ground and natural characteristics and potential acreage and agronomy possibilities and then to hie over to the alternative site in the p.m. and do the same thing.

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on anyone’s particular perspective on these kinds of things, Charlie and his son-in-law Herbie were out pretty late the night before in Gotham with some really hot moonlighting New York showgirls just dancing their buns off, drinking and just carrying on into other unmentionables into the wee hours of the morn.

So on the early morning train ride from NYC to Philly on which they were actually in the PRR Drexel/Morgan special HH railroad parlor car (HH was the designation for Huge Honcho) there was a great Welsh butler who got Charlie and Whig-for-Brains started on this “hair of the dog” that looked something like small bright red fire hydrants with a garden of celery growing out of the top of them.

By the time the train with its special PRR H.H. parlor car pulled into Philadelphia Charlie Blair Macd and Herbie Jenks Whigs were acting something like those cool kites that the Wright Brothers had been experimenting with in Kitty Hawk N.C. before actually taking flight in one of them themselves.

The Drexel & Co limo was waiting for them at the curb at the 30th Street station and the German chauffeur asked them which site they wanted to go to first. At this point, Charlie was about half passed out in the back of the limo fondling the cushions so Herbie Whigout started fumbling through his pockets looking for the directions to the Ardmore site and that alternative site looking over the Schuykill River. He couldn’t find them and so he started fumbling through all Charlie’s pockets too causing Charlie B. to come to like a light bulb and shreek: “What the hell, boy, did my daughter marry some kind of a faggot?!? Whigs said; “Sorry Dad, but we need to find the directions to where we’re supposed to go to design and route a course and be the driving force in a single day behind this new place these Philadelphia MCC novices are trying to do.”

Then C.B remembered he had stashed the directions to the two sites in the super-secret back left pocket of his special custom made tear-off silk Brooks Brothers underpants; and THEN they were off in a flash in that mammoth Drexel & Co Rolls Royce limo (with the initials HGL-H.H monogrammed on all doors).

Only trouble was they went to the alternative 130 acre site overlooking the Schuykill River first that Lesley may’ve bought himself in 1909 that was described by Lesley later as ‘north of the road.’ (What “ROAD?” I’ll get into that some other time).

In the meantime Lesley and Lloyd and the rest of the MCC search committee were waiting for M/W impatiently on the Ardmore site!!

So they arrived at the alternative site and lo and behold who do they find wandering around aimlessly but E.J. Stotesbury who would shortly become the managing partner of Drexel & Co. (Remember Stotesbury, Michael? He was that bigwig goofball looking guy in that old photo hitting the first golf ball off the first tee of Philadelphia Country Club who looked like the pro needed to line him up in the right direction or he might’ve dribbled the first tee shot right at the clubhouse and the spectators instead of the fairway)

Charlie and Whigs knowing that Lloyd was a bigwig partner at Drexel asked Stotesbury if he was a partner of Drexel so of course he said yes because he was. So C.B. and Whig-for-Brains thought Stotesbury must be Lloyd of the MCC search committee so they commenced to doing their thing of checking out the natural characteristics of the ground, the acreage, the turf for agronomic purposes and whatnot. It took them a couple of hours and as they left they yelled over to Stotesbury who was still standing there with a blank expression staring at the sun that they would write him a full report on this site and send it to him in a few days and that they would see him over at the Ardmore site. Stotesbury mumbled; “Whatever.”

The limo was waiting so Charlie and Herbie said: “On to the next site Hans!” But the chauffeur said he just got a message on his blackberry that he had to take Mr. Lloyd to the office shortly. Charlie and Herbie looked at each other non-plussed and said to each other simultaneously “Take Mr. Lloyd to the office?!?” Figuring Stotesbury who they thought was Lloyd must have canceled the appointment for the next site at Ardmore they returned in the limo to the 30th Street Station and took the 3:17pm back to NYC.

In the meantime Lesley and Lloyd and the MCC search committee boys figured they’d been stood up by Macdonald and Whigam and so they all just left. But a few days later Lloyd got a letter from Macdonald with a full blown report, routing and complete hole design for the alternative property. Being the gentlemen they were they just filed it in a report to the board (Exhibit A---the actual Macdonald letter found within the last year at MCC by Wyno Morrision).

So, if you have not figured this all out yet, what it means is what is today Philadelphia Country Club is a total routing and design by Macdonald and Whigam! Did I hear you say, what about the PCC Flynn attribution? Oh, don’t worry about that----that has always obviously been a big mistake or some kind of massive Philly hyperbole trumped up story all these years. Just Philadelphians trying to glorify their own again, you know?!

Do you want to make the call to PCC to tell them they are a full-blown Macdonald (Whigam) golf course Michael or would you prefer I do it?

I’m some kind of "expert GCA researcher/historical analyst", don’t you think?   (BTW--do you realize there is an old quarry on PCC's property? :) ).
« Last Edit: June 05, 2009, 11:00:39 AM by TEPaul »

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #293 on: June 06, 2009, 11:45:08 AM »

Patrick

Is there any correspondence/minutes which mention the land swap and give the reasons for it ? If I have missed it I apologise but without supporting docuumentation for the reasons land swap I think it would be a stretch to contend that the landswap in itself was proof that a routing had been done to accommodate it.

Niall, I may have missed it too, but, I don't recall seeing any supporting documentation.

I disagree with you with respect to the reasons for the land swap, especially if 13 holes had already been configured/routed.
If you routed 13 holes why wouldn't you route the remaining 5 ?
Unless the land available wouldn't accomodate them.
Enter the swap.


Also if the routing was done as you say, wasn't it done a bit premature given the committees subsequent visit to NGLA and the 5 plans that the committee came up with prior to the NGLA visit ?

Not at all, and the perfect example of this exercise is none other than TEPaul himself.
TEPaul's club, Gulph Mills, was considering a move.
TEPaul was familiar with some land, I believe it was Androsian Farms.
TEPaul and/or C&C were involved in routing a new course before they even took title to the land.

So, to answer your question, it's not unusual at all.
NGLA did it only a few years prior to Merion.


I'm struggling a bit here with the timeline and the logic, again I might have missed something.

If a gang draws up plans to rob a bank on 03-01-08 and you first meet and join the gang on 02-01-09, you couldn't have been involved in drawing up plans to rob that bank.  Any attempt by the authorities to prosecute you for that aspect of the crime would fail on the timing of the dates of the plans and the date you first became involved.  The dates and LOGIC would provide your alibi, ergo, not guilty, unless you were O.J. ;D


As an aside, I would be interested to hear an architects thoughts on your comments that you would need to do a full 18 hole routing to determine whether you could get a superior 18 hole golf course on a site. My guess is that not necessarily but interested to hear the experts views.

Why would you think NOT ?

If you have 13 good holes, but can't get in the last 5, you don't have a golf course.
You don't need an expert to tell you that.

Your question has to be answered in the context of the available land and it's quality.
With a good 2,000 acres third graders can come up with a routing with no holes predetermined.
But, with limited and/or unusually configured or unusually topoed land, the process becomes far more difficult.
Unless of course, you feel that these novices put together a superior course without any consideration of the entire 18.
The committee members certainly weren't experts, were they ?



Patrick,

I'll try and respond to your post by numbering the points as unfortunately I don't have your technical ability of embedding responses into previous posts.

1 - Reasons for Land Swap - I wasn't actually putting forward a theory of why the land swap occurred, my point was to show that there might have been a number of reasons for the swap and therefore the fact of the swap (and timing) didn't in itself prove anything with regards to a particular possible reason.

2 - Routing - the point I was trying to make here was that if the routing has already been done then why all the need for subsequent routings being doen after the visit to NGLA. Certainly Patrick I'm not saying that a routing couldn't have been done prior to the land swap but if it was it would appear that it was later discarded, no ? In order to commit to the land you just need to be happy that you can achieve what you want on it which is why In askwed the question of whether you actually needed to do a routing to know that you could get what you wanted. Again interested to hear from any professionals out there.

3 - Timeline - I think I get the point you are looking to make with your bank anology. Again it comes down to whether you are convinced that a full routing was done for the land deal as to whether or not you credit Barker, Wilson or Macdonald.

4 - Routing on 100 plus acres - I would suggest that back then 120 acres was a reasonable sized area to build a course. Any architect is going to look for opportunities and constraints for his design. Any constraints may mean additional land ie bottleneck of land, quarry etc. Do you need to actually do a routing to prove that you may need additional land ? I take your point that they maybe didn't have a topo plan then but they did have the opportunity to walk the land any time they liked and lay out stakes.

Niall

3 -   

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #294 on: June 06, 2009, 12:33:08 PM »
Patrick

I typed the previous post in a bit of a hurry so let me summarise where I think we are. You contend that the land swap shows that there must have been a routing done as that showed the need for the land swap. My contention for what its worth is that is one possible reason for the land swap but it is not necessarily the only reason or neccessarily even the most likely one. You can argue that it is the most likley reason but to my mind you can't say a unsatisfactory routing was definitely the reason for the land swap without supporting documentation. I suspect we are just going to have to agree to differ on that point.

Getting back to my real interest as to who actually did the design for Merion, would you agree that it doesn't really matter whether there was a routing done which pre-emptied the land swap as the course was re-routed after this time ?

Niall

Mike_Cirba

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #295 on: June 06, 2009, 12:51:12 PM »
Patrick

I typed the previous post in a bit of a hurry so let me summarise where I think we are. You contend that the land swap shows that there must have been a routing done as that showed the need for the land swap. My contention for what its worth is that is one possible reason for the land swap but it is not necessarily the only reason or neccessarily even the most likely one. You can argue that it is the most likley reason but to my mind you can't say a unsatisfactory routing was definitely the reason for the land swap without supporting documentation. I suspect we are just going to have to agree to differ on that point.

Getting back to my real interest as to who actually did the design for Merion, would you agree that it doesn't really matter whether there was a routing done which pre-emptied the land swap as the course was re-routed after this time ?

Niall

Niall/Patrick,

You may want to check out the "Timeline" thread this morning.   The sequence of events associated with the Francis Land Swap might become much more clear.   Thanks.

TEPaul

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #296 on: June 06, 2009, 02:11:33 PM »
Cirba:

Are you going to just completely ignore that Immaculate realization/Revelation I had? That was definitely one of my best ever!

Mike_Cirba

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #297 on: June 06, 2009, 02:35:49 PM »
Tom,

Of course not!

You clearly figured the timing and events of the Land Swap out a few weeks back.

You just need to learn how to post pics and diagrams on here so the rest of us catch on quicker!  ;). D)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #298 on: June 06, 2009, 02:37:38 PM »
Tom and Mike,

Now that you've solved the entire timeline, are you willing and able to post a sequential transaction map?

I think it would really help wrap things up.

Mike_Cirba

Re: "Merion Memories" by Richard S. Francis
« Reply #299 on: June 06, 2009, 02:42:44 PM »
Jim,

I kinda think I did some of that on the timeline thread, but I also think it would be useful to get the surveyors report included, especially all the detaila along Golf House Road.

If Tom is agreeable I'd certainly work with him to post appropriate illustrations when he returns from Hawaii, the dog.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back