early articles on NGLA

[Mike_Cirba]

I don't know, David.

Do you think both of those newspapers erroneously reported Maxdonalds intent on the day he bought the 205 acres?

[DMoriarty]

I don't know, David.

Do you think both of those newspapers erroneously reported Maxdonalds intent on the day he bought the 205 acres?

Mike, look at the agreement from 1904.  The information comes right out of the agreement.  They are taking his "general" intent as written in 1904 and applying it to the description of the purchase. 

[Mike_Cirba]

But, David, the article which seems directly from a reporter quoting Macdonald also states that a committee of Macdonald, Travis, Whigham, and Emmett have been selected to create the routing, and that their effort will take 3 months.

Certainly that info isn't something that came from the 1904 agreement, is it?

[DMoriarty]

Mike, the newspaper articles are drawing on different sources, one of which is the 1904 agreement which is where they got the 110 acre figure and the divying up the property idea.   Also, they are all prospective, and don't necessarily reflect what actually happened.

Even still, the article you rely upon makes it abundantly clear that the course would be planned before the purchase took place!  Yet you just ignore that part.

What you do is just assume that the documents mean what you want them to mean.  You hadn't even bothered to check what CBM himself wrote about the origins of the course, or whether there was a different, more logical explanation!   It is poor practice for someone who wants to seriously research this stuff.

[Mike_Cirba]

But, David...

I'm not talking about the acreage.

I'm talking about the incongruity of you stating that the routing was already done when Macdonald purchased the land and two different newspaper accounts both reporting the day after he made the purchase that a committee of four men would route and design the course over the next several months.

I don't think that's from any prospectus in 1904.   That to me sounds like what Macdonald told them at that point, even naming himself, Travis, Whigham, and Emmett as the committee who would be doing that designing.

How is that explainable?

[DMoriarty]

Mike, there is no incongruity, only your blatant misinterpretation.   The record is clear that CBM routed the course BEFORE he finally determined the land to be purchased.   

For example from the Dec 15, 1906 NY Sun article:

“We have a stretch at our disposal of four acres in width and two miles long.  The exact lines will not be staked out until the committee has finished with the plans, for latitude has been given to us in this respect, as all concerned want the course to be ideal."

How many different ways does Macdonald have to say it before you finally get that FIRST they came up with the course and SECOND they purchased the specific land.   

_______________________

Also Mike,  we (and when I say "we" I really mean "you") can learn something else here:  There is a lot of planning to do even after the course has been initially routed.    At this point, they had already largely ROUTED the course and could point specifically to the locations of the holes.   Yet many details remained to be worked out, and the routing was subject to change depending on how the details worked out.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"The company agreed to sell us 205 acres, and we were permitted to locate it as to best serve our purpose. Again, we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted."

Patrick,

I have no doubt that they studied the land in looking for natural features that might support some holes.  For instance, it's clear that Whigham saw the hill used on the Alps hole, and i've also read where the redan setting was pretty apparently obvious to them, as well.

What I am contending, however, is that the record shows that Macdonald purchased 205 acres BEFORE routing the golf course.

The record shows just the opposite of what you cite.

Macdonald himself, states that the seller let them determine where the golf course would be located* (routed) before they took title.
Macdonald previously stated that they found many of the holes they were looking for BEFORE they purchased the land in the Spring of 2007.

He/They also anticpated only needing about 110 acres for the golf course and planned to use the rest to sell lots to members/investors.

Mike, I think you'll find that if you add up the areas I listed, they're considerable.  When you add in the "golf course areas, there's NO room to provide housing unless the pigmy tribe is moving in.  Your information is flawed, and therefore, so are your conclusions.


They were very clear that they left the boundaries very loose at that point, as well, because they wanted to be able to adjust things as their course got routed over the next three months.

That's also untrue.
The boundaries were very clear.
Macdonald knew what land he wanted since he had conceptually determined the routing and many of the individual hole types.
He purchased the land he wanted in the Spring of 2007 and immediately commenced development.

If someone drew a boundary line around the area maintained as golf course today, how many acres is it that they eventually used?

Of the 205 acres, almost all of it, save for the items I listed.
If you were familar with the golf course you would understand the wide playing areas, shared fairways and upper and lower nature of the front and back nine, and the land seperating those elevation differences.

If you'd look at the aerial YOU posted, you'd realize how foolish your earlier statements are  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe Bausch,

In order to assess the authenticity or accuracy of the article you posted, one only needs to read about the location of the "Shinnecock Inn" as reported in the article.

According to the article the Shinnecock Inn was sited on the grounds where the current Sebonack cabins and Clubhouse are located.

However, I believe that the Shinnecock Inn was located on Route 27 directly behind the current 9th green, far removed from the high hill west of the golf course..

[Mike_Cirba]

David/Patrick,

Why did Mac create a committee to plan the course after purchasing the land if the course was already planned?

What exactly were they going to do for five months?

[Patrick_Mucci]

David/Patrick,

Why did Mac create a committee to plan the course after purchasing the land if the course was already planned?

Committee ?
What committee ?
Do you mean Macdonald, Whigham and Travis, which became Macdonald and Whigham, the same two guys that discovered, rode the site and found the holes ?   Committee, or the same two guys that were always involved.

What exactly were they going to do for five months?

In my last coversation with CBM, a brief one at that since I was double parked in front of the cemetery, CBM told me that he and Whigham, his son-in-law, spent most of their time fine tuning the classic holes they discovered.

CBM also told me that the playing areas of NGLA had shrunk due to several reasons and that I should re-examine the 1938 aerial to see how broad and expansive the playing areas and bunkers were.

What do you think they were doing ?

[Mike_Cirba]

I don't know Pat; David says the course was "largely" routed at that time.

What does that mean?  Ten holes?  Fifteen?

Both articles stated that a committee to plan the course was created by Mac right after purchase and that they would be spending up to almost the next half year in their plamming of the golf course prior to any construction.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Why don't you present the thousand questions I know you want to ask about NGLA/Macdonald in a well researched, well written and well presented IN MY OPINION piece? You know, like the one David offered up on this site re Merion.

It sure would be more beneficial than the blatant Tit-for-Tat you've resorted to by concocting this thread, and the vast amount of research/writing time that it will entail should give you a chance to regain your objectivity.

[George_Bahto]

Patrick - the foundation for the Shinnecock Inn is still there back and left of the tenth tee

[TEPaul]

Jim Kennedy:

I just can't imagine why Mike Cirba would want to do something like that with Pat Mucci on here who thinks he speaks to Macdonald and David Moriarty who thinks he knows every damn thing that went on at NGLA as he thinks he knows every damn thing that went on at Merion. And In My Opinion piece, even a good one from Cirba would be like their opportunity to get back at him again for Merion. Those two fellas don't want to learn anything or discuss anything they just want to argue. Both of them live to argue, not to learn. Bradley Anderson captured the whole thing very nicely in a single word----combative!

[Patrick_Mucci]

I don't know Pat;

Mike,

I'm glad that you finally admitted that you don't know.


David says the course was "largely" routed at that time.
What does that mean?  Ten holes?  Fifteen?

You'd have to ask David what he meant, however, I'd view the word "largely" as meaning more than 50 %.

Both articles stated that a committee to plan the course was created by Mac right after purchase and that they would be spending up to almost the next half year in their plamming of the golf course prior to any construction.

Did it ever occur to you that one article may have been a reproduction of the other and thus, equally flawed.
That wouldn't be the first time we've seen that happen, would it ?

Mike, what committee ?  I don't consider Macdonald and Whigham a committee.
Co-workers ?  yes,  A  team ?  yes, but a committee, NO.

I already pointed out a major flaw in the article.
False in one, false in many ?
Why do you cling to newspaper articles ONLY when they seem to support your position even though you know they're unreliable or flat out wrong ?

As to the committee, there was no committee, it was Macdonald  & Whigham, the same two who discovered the land, rode the land, discovered and identified where they would locate holes and route the golf course prior to the purchase of the land.

[Mike_Cirba]

I don't know Pat;

Mike,

I'm glad that you finally admitted that you don't know.


David says the course was "largely" routed at that time.
What does that mean?  Ten holes?  Fifteen?

You'd have to ask David what he meant, however, I'd view the word "largely" as meaning more than 50 %.

Both articles stated that a committee to plan the course was created by Mac right after purchase and that they would be spending up to almost the next half year in their plamming of the golf course prior to any construction.

Did it ever occur to you that one article may have been a reproduction of the other and thus, equally flawed.
That wouldn't be the first time we've seen that happen, would it ?

Mike, what committee ?  I don't consider Macdonald and Whigham a committee.
Co-workers ?  yes,  A  team ?  yes, but a committee, NO.

I already pointed out a major flaw in the article.
False in one, false in many ?
Why do you cling to newspaper articles ONLY when they seem to support your position even though you know they're unreliable or flat out wrong ?

As to the committee, there was no committee, it was Macdonald  & Whigham, the same two who discovered the land, rode the land, discovered and identified where they would locate holes and route the golf course prior to the purchase of the land.

Patrick,

It would have been quite the trick to copy from each other because both new articles appeared in different New York City newspapers on the same day. 

The committee, in case you want to remove your hands from your eyes and stop saying "it can't be, it can't be, it can't be" for just a moment was announced by Macdonald and was made up of; 

Macdonald
Whigham
Emmett
Travis

Macdonald also announced that they'd be planning the course for the next several months, with three months dedicated to the routing and planning of the holes, and two evidently to build topographically-correct plasticene models.

I'm not sure how one spends time planning an already planned course, much less for 5 months, but hey, I have to take Macdonald at his word here. 

Can you or David point me to any accounts that say that Macdonald routed the course and then bought the land?

The only thing I've seen is that they rode the land on horseback for two days looking for potential natural features they could exploit successfully.

That doesn't sound anything like a routing exercise to me, much less anything like a planned course when it was purchased.

Perhaps I'm missing something you guys have quoted that is more specific?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy:

I just can't imagine why Mike Cirba would want to do something like that with Pat Mucci on here who thinks he speaks to Macdonald

TEPaul,

What do you mean, "thinks he speaks to Macdonald" ?
Must I now include you in our conversations ?
Do you promise not to reveal any information gleened from our conversations ?
CBM told me that he remains suspicious of the motives of those with 610 and 215 area codes.
I'll have to ask him if it's OK if I bring you along for our next meeting/conversation.
Remember, no cameras and no recording devices.

and David Moriarty who thinks he knows every damn thing that went on at NGLA as he thinks he knows every damn thing that went on at Merion.
And In My Opinion piece, even a good one from Cirba would be like their opportunity to get back at him again for Merion.

Those two fellas don't want to learn anything or discuss anything they just want to argue.
Both of them live to argue, not to learn.

I was trying to learn more about Merion and in the process asked you if you would provide the Metes and Bounds that Bryan Izatt requested of you.
Yet, you continually refuse, despite numerous requests to answer Bryan's pleas, thus, I can't learn anything until you reveal the information that you've chosen to keep a secret.

Bradley Anderson captured the whole thing very nicely in a single word----combative!

Did Bradley use the words, "evasive" non-repsonsive, coy, disengenuous, secretive or obstructive ?

I don't think I've been the least bit combative on these threads.
I've simply asked that you provide information that's in your possession, information that's part of the public record.
Yet, you continue to hide that information, leading a prudent person to become suspicious of your motives.

In addition, I've asked both you and David to cease the sniping and name calling.
Unfortunately, I've done a poor job of convincing either of you to depersonalize your posts and I've done a poor job of convincing you to present the information Bryan repeatedly requested of you.

Why won't you provide Bryan with the Metes and Bounds ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

It would have been quite the trick to copy from each other because both new articles appeared in different New York City newspapers on the same day. 

Mike,  What does that tell you ?
Could it be that both articles came from the same flawed source ?
Dare you consider that probability ?

The committee, in case you want to remove your hands from your eyes and stop saying "it can't be, it can't be, it can't be" for just a moment was announced by Macdonald and was made up of; 

Macdonald
Whigham
Emmett
Travis

If it was a bona fide committee, on what date was the committee formed and what was the date it ceased to operate as a committee ?

Macdonald also announced that they'd be planning the course for the next several months, with three months dedicated to the routing and planning of the holes, and two evidently to build topographically-correct plasticene models.

To whom did Macdonald announce this to ?

The flawed newspaper articles ?

You allegation conflicts with Macdonald's written word.

I'm not sure how one spends time planning an already planned course, much less for 5 months, but hey, I have to take Macdonald at his word here. 

That's the problem, you're not taking Macdonald at his word, his published word.
Instead you once again cling to obviously flawed newspaper articles.

Can you or David point me to any accounts that say that Macdonald routed the course and then bought the land?

Yes, I can.
But, I've already done that on several occassions.
You just refuse to accept Macdonald's written word.

The only thing I've seen is that they rode the land on horseback for two days looking for potential natural features they could exploit successfully.

Let me see if I understand you.
Because you have limited access to the facts, you dismiss that which you haven't yet read.
Now I'm begining to understand how flawed your reasoning is

That doesn't sound anything like a routing exercise to me, much less anything like a planned course when it was purchased.

Mike, if anyone thought you were in denial on this topic, you're quickly confirming their suspicions.
Please, stop making a fool of yourself, you're destroying your credibility.

Jim Kennedy, politely told you the same thing. 
Why don't you listen to him ?  Surely, he's an objective observer.

Perhaps I'm missing something you guys have quoted that is more specific?

That's the understatement of the year.
Is the source of your information on NGLA and CBM & HW based solely on what David Moriarty and I post on this subject ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim Kennedy,

I don't know the early story of NGLA and never pretended to.

Mostly, I know what is in George Bahto's book, and I also know what David told us in his Merion essay, but then I read these articles in two separate New York City newspapers that Joe Bausch uncovered that sound like they came from newsmen who were in the room the day Macdonald announced his land purchase and they absolutely fly in the face of what David's essay contends.

Now, someone is wrong here.   I'm just asking questions because we were told that Macdonald bought the land he needed for the already routed and designed golf course, implying that he did the same thing at Merion, and these articles tell us almost the complete opposite.

So, I just want to give David the fair chance to respond on a thread distinct from the ones on Merion, precisely as he asked me to do.

Perhaps both writers were just wrong...I don't know, but when David suddenly couches his terminology with qualifiers like "largely", as in "largely routed", then I sense something isn't adding up.

Nobody should be afraid of the answers here.   I'm just trying to understand.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,

Again we are in a situation where you are maintaining a position and I have absolutely no idea what you think your factual basis is.   Jim has a good suggestion.   If you actually tried to organize your thoughts and the facts you might understand that you are talking in circles.   I thought you might realize this if you started a thread, but you are still at it.  

Also Mike, I think you are getting yourself confused by failing to acknowledge that one can generally route a course and come up with hole concepts yet still have plenty of planning to do, whether on paper or by laying out the holes on the ground.    They came up with the hole locations and concepts, and then they spent some time working out the details.    

Good luck with the IMO.
______________________________________________
Patrick,

I am not thrilled with the tone of my posts, but I am done putting up with TEPaul's lies, misrepresentations, and baseless attempts to smear me and my essay.  

That being said I remain willing to have a civil discussion fact based discussion, just as soon as anyone brings forth verifiable facts worth discussing.  

But so long as TEPaul and Wayne are playing games with the documents this is all just pointless propoganda on their part.

[Mike_Cirba]

I mean, I'm sure most here didn't take the time to read those lengthy pieces.

So, let me post some more succinct segments;

**edit** David, just read your post.   I don't have any "position".   I'm just asking questions based on what seems to me to be a fairly large gap in what has been maintained and what these articles report.

The article says they were going to spend the next three months "staking out the course".

That sure sounds like routing to me.

What did you mean earlier when you said the course was "largely routed" prior to purchase?   How many holes were routed when they purchased the land?   Do we know which ones?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy,

I don't know the early story of NGLA and never pretended to.

That would account for the erroneous conclusions you've drawn

Mostly, I know what is in George Bahto's book, and I also know what David told us in his Merion essay, but then I read these articles in two separate New York City newspapers that Joe Bausch uncovered that sound like they came from newsmen who were in the room the day Macdonald announced his land purchase and they absolutely fly in the face of what David's essay contends.

What do you mean, "they sound like they came from newsmen who were in the room the day that Macdonald announced his land purchase" ?

Where was Macdonald when this alleged announcement was made ?
Who was in attendance with Macdonald ?

Now, someone is wrong here.  
I'm just asking questions because we were told that Macdonald bought the land he needed for the already routed and designed golf course,

Macdonald himself tells us that.

implying that he did the same thing at Merion,

You've got your words wrong.
The word is "INFER", not "IMPLY.
No one IMPLIED that, YOU INFERED that.
Do you understand the distinction ?

and these articles tell us almost the complete opposite.

It's interesting to see how ONLY you give these articles the same credence as Macdonald's written words
The articles are flawed in the same way that the articles announcing Wilson's trip abroad prior to 1912 were flawed.
Yet, you continually accept flawed newspaper articles that serve your cause, as authentic.
I know you're desperate to disprove David's premise,  but, please, try to retain a high degree of intellectual honest.

So, I just want to give David the fair chance to respond on a thread distinct from the ones on Merion, precisely as he asked me to do.

Perhaps both writers were just wrong...I don't know, but when David suddenly couches his terminology with qualifiers like "largely", as in "largely routed", then I sense something isn't adding up.

That's because you either have limited information, are in denial concerning Macdonald's written word, or both.

Nobody should be afraid of the answers here.   I'm just trying to understand.

Evidently TEPaul is because he won't provide Bryan Izatt with the Metes and Bounds.
Why don't you appeal to him to come forward with information in his possession.
Then we can all understand more about the issues related to the acquisition of land at Merion.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,  Of course you have a position.  You changed the name of your other thread to add "NGLA bombshell" and above you stated there and above that CBM bought the land before the routed the course.     You also did one of your euphoric yet premature victory dances all over the other threads before you finally made it over here.

As for your questions, I suggest you read that portion of Scotland's Gift as well as CBM's Statement to the Founders written near the time of the formal opening, along with the appendix - the 1904 agreement, and then read the articles again, keeping those other more direct sources in mind.   It all makes sense to me and I am sure it will to you to if you actually try to figure it out.

And Mike, don't read too much into words like largely routed.  As far as I know it was routed, but I wasn't there and they were definitely leaving themselves a bit of wiggle room to work out the details.  Same as at Merion.

[Mike_Cirba]

David/Patrick,

Your issues shouldn't be with me.

It should be with these articles.

Patrick, I see you've already completely dismissed them, but they sound to me to have way too much detail to be puff pieces. 

They outline all of the principals, the who, what where, when, all in great detail, and include direct quotes from Macdonald.

Seems like very excellent contemporaneous journalism to me.

Perhaps you can dispute the articles and the claims they state instead of faulting me for bringing them to your attention?

[Patrick_Mucci]

I mean, I'm sure most here didn't take the time to read those lengthy pieces.

So, let me post some more succinct segments;
**edit** David, just read your post.   I don't have any "position".   I'm just asking questions based on what seems to me to be a fairly large gap in what has been maintained and what these articles report.

The article says they were going to spend the next three months "staking out the course".

An article also stated that the Shinnecock Inn was on the high hill west of the golf course when NOTHING could be FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.
Yet, you continue to disengenuously accept these flawed accounts as opposed to accounts recorded by Macdonald's own hand.
You're making a fool of yourself.

Obviously, you're so desperate to decoy everyone's attention away from Merion that you refuse to believe Macdonald's written words.

That sure sounds like routing to me.

Mike, it can sound like pornography if you'd like, it doesn't matter.
Macdonald's written word is a/the more credible source than two newspaper articles, OR, didn't you learn anything from the newspaper articles that claimed that Wilson sailed to the UK and studied the great courses prior to 1912

What did you mean earlier when you said the course was "largely routed" prior to purchase?   How many holes were routed when they purchased the land?   Do we know which ones?

It's immaterial.  Macdonald clearly stated that he chose the configuration of the land based on what he needed to route and place the holes on the golf course and for the golf course.

It doesn't get much clearer than that, unless of course you're in denial with respect to the facts and chronology, which I believe describes your position accurately.

Please, stop trying to create false premises in an attempt to divert the attention from the issue of the acquisition of land at Merion.
If Jim Kennedy is questioning your motives you know you're off base.