News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #625 on: August 20, 2010, 02:29:40 PM »
"That 117 was within a greater 130 and to be determined as the routing evolved. By the time the routing was complete the 117 agreed to was not enough, and they needed 120."


Sully:

I like that. 'As the routing evolved', huh? Well, you know I think that would definitely explain one thing about that committee, and that is why they put a member/surveyor/engineer on it---eg Richard Francis. Through that winter and spring of 1911 when they reported they did numerous courses and five different plans, or even if they were all out there together in 1910 doing numerous courses, the way you describe this process, I guess every time they made a decision to change anything about any hole of those last five Richard Francis was probably having to do another metes and bounds survey every day or at least every other day to see how they were doing on their 117 acre target. After a while he probably just got sick of it and said: "God-damn-it you SOBs, I'm just going to put a triangle next to the Haverford College land and if this course turns to be like 120 acres because of it then I'll bet you fifty cents Horatio will tell me that's just hunky-dory.


Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #626 on: August 20, 2010, 02:32:45 PM »
Oh...one more question if I might,

If they already realized they needed 120 acres by Nov 1910 because of Francis' brainstorm, and not the 117 they originally secured, then why did the circulation letter that month mention only 117 acres secured, and why did Hugh Wilson mention again the 117 acres in February 1911?

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #627 on: August 20, 2010, 02:45:15 PM »
Just so we're all in agreement, we're saying that Merion had located the first 13 holes south of and along the clubhouse, but were now trying to squeeze their final 5 holes of their championship course into the area I have outlined in dark blue (out to today's Golf House Road), and had just used up their first par three on the back nine with the 13th?

I'm excluding the land across from the clubhouse because Francis told us that it wasn't part of any golf layout.

Are we all on the same page?

Mike,   Francis didn't say that they never considered any of the land west of where the road ultimately ended up.  He said there was some land on the west of the current course that didn't fit in with any layout plan.  HE GETS NO MORE SPECIFIC THAN THAT.  And he couldn't have meant exactly all the land west of the road because THERE WAS NO ROAD.  

They were considering the land, and it was available, it just didn't fit with anything they wanted to do.

Here is the approximate "L" which Francis refers.   The land within the "L" is the land they were trying to work with (excluding the RR land.)    The couldn't fit the final five holes in the lower, shorter portion of the "L", so the gave away the part across the road (which wasn't there until they determined the course) and got the triangle.


« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 02:48:05 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #628 on: August 20, 2010, 02:51:51 PM »
"3.  The land West of the College Property was not being considered because Francis tells us it was not being considered.    Specifically, Francis tells us that the land now covered with fine homes along Golf House Road was swapped for the 130 yd. by 190 yd. section of land next to Haverford College.   From this, we know two things:
-- Before the swap, the land covered with fine houses across Golf House Road was available to Merion for the golf course.
-- Before the swap, the land next to Haverford College was NOT being considered for a golf course."



First of all, Francis never said the land west of the Haverford College property was not being considered. Francis never used the words "Haverford College" or "Haverford College Property," "the land next to Haverford College property."



This is what Francis actually said in his 1950 article about the triangle:

"Mr Llyod agreed. The land now covered by fine homes along Golf House Road was exchanged for land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long----the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee."



Not to mention the fact that the land in green (golf course) on that triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 Land Plan was 310 yards long----eg about 190 yards in green contiguous to the Haverford College line and another 120 yards in green contiguous to the McFadden Property.

I sort of feel bad for poor Dick Francis when he told that story about forty years after the fact; obviously he wasn't all that exact about a few things he said in that article and the way he described that idea of his to get the 15th green and 16th tee up in there is an example.

If one wants to always and without exception go by his exact words in that description, would anyone actually say or believe that the 15th GREEN and the 16th TEE is 130 yards WIDE and 190 yards LONG or ever was??    ??? ::) ;)
« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 03:00:07 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #629 on: August 20, 2010, 03:17:23 PM »
Man, what a stupid guy I am. How many times have I played that 15th hole over the years? If I had ever just thought to take Richard Francis specifically at his exact words in that story!

Just think, any time I got in that 130 yards wide by 190 yards long triangle over on the west where he said the 15th green is I could've putted the ball. And on #16, if I'd just teed it up at the very front of that 190 yard long 16th tee, hell, I might've been able to hit that par 4 16th quarry hole green in one with a driver, maybe.   :P

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #630 on: August 20, 2010, 03:25:27 PM »
"Oh...one more question if I might,

If they already realized they needed 120 acres by Nov 1910 because of Francis' brainstorm, and not the 117 they originally secured, then why did the circulation letter that month mention only 117 acres secured, and why did Hugh Wilson mention again the 117 acres in February 1911?"


Oh come on Cirba, why do you keep asking dumb questions. Haven't you figured out the truth about Hugh Wilson yet? Didn't you learn from that essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion," that Wilson was a total novice in 1910 and 1911 and wasn't capable of much and certainly not capable of routing a golf course??

Futhermore, didn't I tell you Wilson went to Princeton? God knows how many guys I've known over the years who graduated from Princeton and honestly I can't count on two hands the ones who could actually count all the way to 120. Getting as far as 117 isn't actually all that bad for a Princeton grad.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #631 on: August 20, 2010, 03:48:03 PM »
Poor Dick Francis?  His description of the land involved - the approx.. 130 yard wide by 190 yd tall portion of land, the location of the 15th tee and the 16th tee - is clear as it could be.   And the measure is correct. That land measured approximately 130 x 190 yards.

How are we to understand your indignation and sarcasm about the description and your absurdities about how Francis was describing the size of the 15th green?  It hardly seems productive or relevant.  And it certainly isn't accurate.

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)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #632 on: August 20, 2010, 03:50:53 PM »
You guys are presenting a very unique challenge here...


Mike,

I did answer your question. Your inability to understand what I am saying has caused the confusion. The land already acquired had to be "swapped" back to HDC...your confusion is due to the fact that this happened before the formal deed had transferred to Lloyd. That's why Lloyd was the guy to answer the question. He owned HDC and was driving the negotiations for MCC. After Wilson was apponted Chairman, he would have been the guy to go to.



Quote
"One other question....

Which of any transactional documents or internal club records indicates they were working with, or looking at a 130 acre parcel in the first place?"

None that I know of.




Quote
"But I am working real hard Sully, to see your logic here and I think I've done it. You're going to be amazed too because I think I can clearly shows via truly "verifiable facts" who the architects were who routed and designed Merion East and I agree with you that they did it in 1910 and not in 1911, and I think they basically did it in the late summer months and early fall months of 1910.


Would you like to hear "My Thesis" in detail?
"

Sure, I'll bite...





Quote
"Oh...one more question if I might,

If they already realized they needed 120 acres by Nov 1910 because of Francis' brainstorm, and not the 117 they originally secured, then why did the circulation letter that month mention only 117 acres secured, and why did Hugh Wilson mention again the 117 acres in February 1911?"

They didn't...which I've said two dozen times. But they did know they were going to go up to the 15th green and down from the 16th tee at that point and it solved their problems in fitting in the last 5.

They knew the length needed, but not the width. The width is what dictated the re-shaping or GHR from the "Approximate Road" to the actual as built road...which resulted in an additional 3 acre purchase.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 04:14:25 PM by Jim Sullivan »

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #633 on: August 20, 2010, 04:07:10 PM »
Jim,

There's a couple of things I can't get past, not the least of which is; I can't imagine anyone ever going to that property and not seeing the potential of approaching the quarry from north to south.

But, I'm a bit weary of typing at the moment and would love to hear your theory, Jim.

Thanks

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #634 on: August 20, 2010, 04:11:19 PM »
"They knew the length needed, but not the width. The width is what dictated the re-shaping or GHR from the "Approximate Road" to the actual as built road...which resulted in an additional 3 acre purchase."


Sully:

WHEN do you and your thesis think that happened?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #635 on: August 20, 2010, 04:13:38 PM »
Mike,

I don't think they thought of golf holes when they decided to subdivide the property with several preliminary boundaries...including one going across from the Haverford College property.

I hope that eases your mind.

I think non-golfers (HDC) selected the land to offer (and I think David's presumption is most likely within the total area considered) and MCC added the Dallas Estate to adjust the thinking from 100 (clearly not enough) to 120.

It's soon after the committment to secure this land that I speculate they were on the property planning golf holes and they realized the top portion was too tight...hence the need to solve the problem.

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #636 on: August 20, 2010, 04:17:31 PM »
Jim,

With you so far except the small matter of it being about 129 acres, not 120, but please proceed. 

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #637 on: August 20, 2010, 04:17:44 PM »
"They knew the length needed, but not the width. The width is what dictated the re-shaping or GHR from the "Approximate Road" to the actual as built road...which resulted in an additional 3 acre purchase."


Sully:

WHEN do you and your thesis think that happened?



What?

The realization that they needed more width than could fit within 117 acres?

Through the winter and spring 1910 into 1911, ending with a fully developed plan in time for the April Board Meeting.

How fast could you and I plan and design a golf course from scratch? Including developing all of the blueprints and contour maps...Is there any chance we could do it in 3 months?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #638 on: August 20, 2010, 04:23:12 PM »
Jim,

With you so far except the small matter of it being about 129 acres, not 120, but please proceed.  

Mike,

That's the 130 I've referenced...I don't think it was in a particular plan.

Try this - you and I are buddies and you've got a 50 acre farm that you would like to sell to someone. I'm looking to buy 10 or 12 acres for a marijuana farm. You're going to sell the leftover to a bunch of hippies who are lined up at the gates with checks in hand. Do you really care which 10 or 12 acres I use? If I told you weed grows better in some areas than others (similar to grapes...) you'd probably be pretty liberal in letting me find the best 10 or 12 acres because afterall, the better the pot growing, the more you can charge the hippies, right?

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #639 on: August 20, 2010, 04:36:27 PM »
"Through the winter and spring 1910 into 1911, ending with a fully developed plan in time for the April Board Meeting."


I see. So are you saying you don't think they had that width problem you speak of solved before Nov. 10, 1910? Are you saying you think they solved that problem at the earliest in Dec. 1910 and at the lastest early April, 1911, like just before C.B. came back (April 6, 1910) and deemed one of the routing plans that he approved as having the best last seven holes of any inland course in the world?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #640 on: August 20, 2010, 04:41:31 PM »
Quote
"Are you saying you think they solved that problem at the earliest in Dec. 1910 and at the lastest early April, 1911, like just before C.B. came back (April 6, 1910) and deemed one of the routing plans that he approved as having the best last seven holes of any inland course in the world?"

Yes. Really anytime after the 11/15/1910 Plan was drawn and presented works.

This obviously ties into my reading of the words "lay-outs" and "plans" in April by Wilson, but please notice that he uses those two terms in the plural, but the word "course" in the singular. It's important to my thesis.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #641 on: August 20, 2010, 05:46:43 PM »
"Quote
"But I am working real hard Sully, to see your logic here and I think I've done it. You're going to be amazed too because I think I can clearly shows via truly "verifiable facts" who the architects were who routed and designed Merion East and I agree with you that they did it in 1910 and not in 1911, and I think they basically did it in the late summer months and early fall months of 1910."


Sure, I'll bite..."



OK Sully, I realize that poor Merion and its poor history and poor historians and poor history writers have already been through too much already with us on here but here is my new thesis that pretty much goes along with your thinking----eg somebody was out there routing and designing a course in 1910 and maybe even in July and August and Sept and Oct. of 1910 before the HDC offer went to MCC on Nov. 10, 1910. My thesis is based on yours---eg smart men just don't buy land for a golf course before they are pretty certain exactly what that golf course is going to look like and be like!!!!!!!

So here's what I think happened, and I am going to supply undeniable evidence for it and "verifiable facts!"   

Who do we actually KNOW (verifiable facts, now) who was undeniably out on that land in those summer and fall months of 1910?

1/ We know Macdonald and Whigam were out there once in June of 1910 but not an iota of evidence puts either one at Ardmore until April 6, 1911. And we know Barker was there in early June but other than some wacko GCA analyst who thinks he jumped off a train on the way from New York to Georgia there is not an iota of evidence he was ever at Ardmore at any other time in 1910. Wilson, Griscom, Toulmin and Francis? Well, they lived here but no one ever said they were actually out there in 1910 routing and designing that course in 1910 and either did they.

But Horatio Gates Lloyd and Edward W. Connell were out there because one was the clear representative for MCC to negotiate with HDC and the other was clearly the HDC representative to negotiate with MCC. And the original HDC offer to MCC on Nov. 10, 1910 confirms this in writing (do you want to see it?). So we sure know they were out there because the records of MCC say they were the ones who negotiated the HDC offer of 117 acres to MCC and they were both part of the HDC structure too then.

So, I’m concluding that Horatio Gates Lloyd and Edward W. Connell routed and designed Merion East or were the driving force behind it and I am going to strongly petition Merion GC to accept this and change the architectural attribution of the early Merion East from Wilson and his committee to Lloyd and Connell.

But what about this century old story of Wilson and Committee designing Merion East? I think that’s an almost total fabrication and here’s my reasoning:

It all actually revolves around Richard Francis and his relationship with Lloyd. I mean, come on Sully, what kind of dumb story is that 1950 article of Francis’ that he rode his bike over to Lloyd’s place after midnight? What grown man or straight man is going to do that? Not a single one, I tell you. Therefore (or should I yell it right from the shoulder, THEREFORE, like those excellent and stentorian legal minds and debaters, F. Lee Bailey, Melvin Belli and David Moriarty do?), I think it is very likely, or probable or strongly presumable to conclude that Richard Francis had a queer eye for Horatio Gates Lloyd and being the incredibly powerful man Lloyd was (like a lot of powerful men like that) he probably got into the occasional kinky stuff with maids of butlers or gay men or even some cats and dogs late at night when his wife was asleep and after a hard day at the office underwriting California or whatnot.

Rode his bike to see Lloyd after midnight to swap some damn land on a golf course!? Phssshaw! Well, I don’t doubt he did and probably a number of times. I mean the gay blade probably rode his bike over there 3-7 times of more so his car wouldn’t wake up Mrs Lloyd.

Wilson, Toulmin and Griscom? Not a bit of truth in that. And no truth in Francis doing anything out there either. The whole thing is a big fantasy idolization move on Merion’s part and a great big cover-up to hide the fact that Francis was gay and Horatio occasionally let him fool around in 1910 or so. I don’t think there even was a Wilson Committee, at least there was never one actually recorded in the MCC meeting minutes. Oh sure, Hugh liked grass! We ALL know that! He loved to touch it and smell it and I think he even tried smoking some of it too. And there is no question at all he was heavily involved in the agronomy of Merion East and West but not its architecture except maybe hiring that loop-de-loop Pickering to construct the place. Merion East may be the finest example of “flask” architecture the world has ever known because of Pickering’s construction hand and flask. And that young little Flynn may’ve been brought in by Wilson too.

So that’s my thesis, and I can prove it. Nay, belay that, I just did.

The whole thing was a big ruse to cover up some ineffable sexual misconduct and the real architects of Merion East were Lloyd and Connell. Sure both of them got totally minimized for what they did but Lloyd engineered the whole thing on purpose, including his own minimization as the primary architect of Merion East.

In my opinion, that Horatio Gates Lloyd was an incredible guy and the time has now come, a century after the fact, for the club to honor him for what he did for them!



TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #642 on: August 20, 2010, 05:52:37 PM »
Sully:

I apologize for that momentary diversion on that last post with the truth about the early history of Merion East so now let's get back to discussing more important things, like things that don't really matter to the history of Merion East.


You said:

"Yes. Really anytime after the 11/15/1910 Plan was drawn and presented works."


So, then, are you saying at some time after that and even perhaps all the way to early April, 1911 was when the thing they solved with that Francis story was just a width problem?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #643 on: August 20, 2010, 06:06:09 PM »
Are you kidding?

You and Mike are the only ones in history to think the re-shaping of a non-existent road actually happened.

The Francis Swap was breaking through a pre-determined hard boundary WITHIN the Johnson Farm land to go up the second half of the 15th hole and down the first half of the 16th hole. This would have happened prior to that map being drawn...simply because the map represents and "approximation" of this result. I told you yesterday that this must have been an informal, or stick, routing which did not accurately represent the width needed to build the holes. Once they built the holes they re-measured and it came to 120 acres.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #644 on: August 20, 2010, 06:18:05 PM »
Sully:

I see. That actually may be the clearest explanation of your thesis to date. So when do you think they finally remeasured it to 120 and what do you think they did then about asking if they could buy three additional acres than the original agreement of 117 for $85,000 provided for?

So, it seems like you are saying you think the actual "land swap" created only the 130 by 190 triangle and took place before Nov 10, 1910 but the request for an additional three acres was another determination and another event that took place later.

Would that be an accurate description of your "thesis?"

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #645 on: August 20, 2010, 06:24:14 PM »
Sully:

And let me see if I can get you do go on record on here for something else you say you don't believe.

You said you don't believe that Macdonald routed or designed that course in 1910 or helped Lloyd and Francis do it as that essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" suggests, assumes or concludes?

Is that correct?

And you say you don't believe it because Macdonald's actual letter just suggests nothing of the kind?

Is that correct?

But you do think that Wilson and his committee were out there doing a considerable amount of routing and design work in 1910?

Is that correct too?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #646 on: August 20, 2010, 06:25:53 PM »
I think they re-measured it to 120 (plus the RR 3) once they had teh holes really designed, even if not yet built...but it would have to be prior to the April Board Meeting in which they presented the plan and gained approval to build it...and buy the necessary 3 acres additional land. Notice that they paid retail for that land...which certainly suggests their recognition of the actual size was late in the process.

I think the swap created the triangle, but I don't think at that point they had any idea of what its dimensions would be...the end result was 130 X 190.


I know they bought the 120 for the same $85,000 they agreed to pay for 117 but I am not sure what to make of that...any ideas?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #647 on: August 20, 2010, 06:29:00 PM »
Sully:

And let me see if I can get you do go on record on here for something else you say you don't believe.

You said you don't believe that Macdonald routed or designed that course in 1910 or helped Lloyd and Francis do it as that essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" suggests, assumes or concludes?

Is that correct?

And you say you don't believe it because Macdonald's actual letter just suggests nothing of the kind?

Is that correct?

But you do think that Wilson and his committee were out there doing a considerable amount of routing and design work in 1910?

Is that correct too?


All three would be correct, with the caveat being that for CBM to note the three acres behind the clubhouse he would almost certainly have pictured and recommended a hole there. Once a single hole is placed, some routing credit has to be given...but in general, his letter was so submissive to their efforts, and their problems that I can't see how he would feel he was engaged in the process much at all.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 06:35:37 PM by Jim Sullivan »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #648 on: August 20, 2010, 06:36:47 PM »
In addition Tom...the further back the routing process and hole design process goes, the more CBM deserves credit because they were clearly leaning on him heavily in March and April 1911...

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #649 on: August 20, 2010, 06:38:55 PM »
Sully:

Regarding your #646, are you saying you think the Francis story in 1950 only involved a "land swap" that created the 130 by 190 triangle before Nov 10, 1910 and not the determination that they needed not 117 acres to buy but actually an additional three acres to buy for 120? (the RR land was separate).

PS:
I guess it goes without saying with you that a land swap is generally a like-kind for like-kind nonremunerative exchange. At least that's the way we used to do it in real state brokerage.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back