[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Please tell me which points you see as speculative, and we can discuss them.

[DMoriarty]

David,

What do you have that proves Lloyd was out there on the property in 1910, after the July 1 meetings and letters?

Jim, I don't know if anyone was out there in the field from CBM's visit in June 1910 until February 1, 1911, except for the surveyor who apparently drew up a contour map sometime between these two dates.  By the way, Francis wasn't out there in the field when he had his epiphany. He was looking over MAPS in the middle of the night.  [Surely Mike Cirba will pretend that the Francis' statement necessarily puts him out in the field with survey tools around the same time of his epiphany, but that is NOT what Francis wrote.]
_________________________________________________________________

Jeff,
The evidence of Francis' early involvement again comes mostly from the Francis statement.  He was reporting to Lloyd directly, not Wilson.  He was out riding his bike around midnight, so it was more likely during fair weather.  Mostly though, it is the same evidence I think indicates when the swap took place.   He tells us the details of the swap, and I believe his description was accurate.   And when I consider the map and his description together, I believe his involvement must have been before the map was drawn. That is because, while the details were not yet worked out, the map indicates that the land up in the rectangle near the present 16th tee and 15th green had already been added, and the land on which the fine homes were built had already been subtracted.

Just to be clear, I have no reason to think he was out there, independent of the above. But contrary to the usual banter by the usual suspects,  I am not claiming Francis was out there as if it were evidence of when the swap took place.  Quite the opposite.  We know Francis had the idea for the swap, so if we can determine when the swap took place, then we know the timing of this contribution by Francis.
___________________________________________________________

Jeff,  I am wondering if you could use your knowledge as a designer to help me figure something out about this counter theory to mine?

 I understand how a flexible border would give Merion the leeway to tweak design details on an already routed golf course, but I'm having trouble seeing how a soft west boundary would give them much more flexibility than that.  Tweaking the location of the road would have allowed them to go from not quite wide enough for two holes across to wide enough for two holes across at a particular point.  But this pretty much assumes they were already shooting for two holes across at that particular point, doesn't it?

Remember, we are supposed to believe that in November 1910 - almost six months after CBM wrote he would need a contour map to see if the course would fit - Merion agreed to buy 117 acres even though they hadn't even bothered to follow up with CBM or to come up with their own workable routing yet.   And we are asked to believe that not even a rough routing was necessary because, while most of the border was locked in place, MCC had wiggle room to tweak the west border above Ardmore Avenue.  

Without a routing in place how could they know that this single accommodation would give them enough flexibility to guarantee that their yet-to-be-determined routing would work at all, much less give them a first class course?  Why would they have boxed themselves into such a narrow swath of land without a routing?  And what would have happened if just about every square inch of that land (plus some more) hadn't turned out to be usuable?

For example, let's say hypothetically that the lease of the 3 acres of RR land (the site of the 13th hole and a big chunk of the 12th) couldn't be worked out.  Seems like they'd have had a pretty large problem and a pretty short course.   Or lets say hypothetically that the quarry turned out to be unusable for golf. (Legend has it that some at Merion thought the quarry would have to be filled in for it to be usuable!) A tweak here or there along that "soft west edge" road wouldn't have solved that problem.  Nor would a tweak here or there solve any other major routing issue, would it?    

Is it just me, or would it have been absolutely incredible for them to box themselves in like they did without some idea of a routing?   Remember, this was 1910, and these were businessmen, not golf course architects like yourself.

Even in modern times it would seem ridiculous.  Say a couple of businessmen invite you to inspect an oddly shaped piece of property they are considering for purchase, and after inspecting the land, you send them a letter mentioning some of the better features, etc., but also write that without a contour map you cannot know for certain whether they have enough land for a first class golf course.   Then, without ever bothering with a contour map and without ever bothering to even try a routing to see if a real course would fit, they go ahead and buy the land and try to build a golf course on it but it just doesn't fit.

Aside from laughing your ass off because they screwed up by not hiring you, what do you think of these guys?  Would you think that they had done the right thing by buying the land even though they didn't bother with due diligence to see if it would work?   Did they act reasonably?  Or was purchasing the land before they knew it would work unbelievably stupid?   Would your opinion change if they had reserved the right to tweak one part of the border a few yards  here or there?  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

I like your thinking in #922 but I'm not sure I would use an acreage of 124 on that Nov. 15, 1910 Land Plan. They probably meant to indicate 117 acres as reflected in their agreement of Nov 1910 (as it seems the committee probably had their eye on the 3 acre RR land Macdonald recommended getting that would create 120) even though that map may not be accurately measurable to that. I think the 124 number came from one of us on here and not from anyone back then. The agreement between the two parties and the MCC and HDC records supporting it are the only facts we have from Nov. 1910 and that Land Plan map was apparently supposed to reflect that agreement and supporting records. If anyone back then thought it significant to include something about Francis influencing the outcome back then I see no reason why they wouldn't have; they certainly did record a lot of other detail about what they were doing then in the latter half of 1910, even if they certainly weren't being public about it for a time. Other than that I see no reason for any of us on here to just try to make things up about what they were thinking and doing as David Moriarty did in his essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion."

By the way, I have spoken to Merion about the correspondence reflecting the negotiations between Lloyd and Connell in 1910 that are referred to in some of the MCC records. It seems that material was probably considered to be Lloyd's personal records and may not have been reposited with MCC. I have spoken to Horatio Gates Lloyd's great nephew who I've known around here for years about looking into Lloyd's life and records but nothing much has come of it yet. But one never knows with people like that as sometimes those kinds of families donate generations of family records to universities and such as apparently the Leeds family of Boston (Herbert Leeds of Myopia) has done.

[TEPaul]

"By the way, Francis wasn't out there in the field when he had his epiphany. He was looking over MAPS in the middle of the night.  [Surely Mike Cirba will pretend that the Francis' statement necessarily puts him out in the field with survey tools around the same time of his epiphany, but that is NOT what Francis wrote.]"



David Moriarty:

Actually, that is precisely what Francis wrote in his 1950s article (that he was out in the field). If you're going to attempt to contribute to this subject you should try to actually READ ALL of Francis' article instead of just some part of it that you might feel supports your limited point and premise in your essay.

Are you at least able to read the whole article and admit that you are wrong in what you just said and that Francis does, in FACT mention in his article he was out in the field?

That should be a pretty interesting test for you on here, I suppose! 

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Did you ever wonder why they didn't locate the 14th green along the quarry?  It certainly would have made for a dramatic and scary approach.

Although my drawing is crude, and I've probably got it a little close for comfort, it would have been very easy for them to get those last holes in that available width if not for the design decision to provide an alternate fairway route around the quarry.  

You'll notice that all the land I've saved...coincidentally is the land that bulges out of the difference between today's course and that November 1910 Land Plan.

Interestingly, we saw a very similar thing when Wilson and his friends designed Cobb's Creek.  On their original proposed map they had located the 6th hole very close to a steep dropoff that ran from the fairway landing area all the way up to the green.   Along that hole to the left were three holes that ran perpendicular to the 6th, being the original 8th, 9th, and 11th.   On the original map they were roughly estimated to be 420, 430, and 570, respectively.

When built those holes were only 387, 400, and 513.   What happened?

Well, it wasn't until we later superimposed an "as built" over the original topo map that we determined that the 6th actually had to get moved further left than drawn.   Perhaps the ground over there was too sloped and there wasn't enough room to keep balls in play...perhaps they ran into some issues with tree removal, as they had to work around existing trees.

Whatever the reason, they had to make a decision in the field that led to them moving the entire 16th fairway and green left of what they originally proposed, and that had unintended consequences for adjoining holes.   In the case of Cobb's Creek, they were working with a fixed acreage, so they couldn't do anything but shorten those holes.

I think something very similar is what happened here.  Design decisions, probably once out and dealing with the reality of what was on the ground and not on paper forced them around the quarry, which then forced other holes to be taken out wider than was originally anticipated/planned, which then required adjustments of land between golf and real estate, as well as the addition of 3 acres.   Cobb's Creek didn't have the option to expand their acreage, but Merion...through Lloyd, did.  

One last point from the dead horse.   The MCC minutes speak of swappoing land for other land "adjoining".   I'm not sure I'd refer to the triangle in that way, would you?





Conversely, if one is to take Francis as meaning they only added the triangle of land in the swap, you have to believe that Merion located their first 13 holes, including using up one par three on the back nine across from the clubhouse, and then were going to try and fit their last five finishing holes in this acreage.    That to me indicates that they'd have to be insane, as well as purposefully ignoring CBM's good advice in June 1910 that much could be made of the quarry.




Jim,

What are your thoughts on this?


Also,

Do I need to repost the Francis article?

Suddenly, it seems he's no longer in the field running instruments at the time of his brainstorm, per David's latest post.  

So, I guess he was using Pugh & Hubbard's map?

Which would have him on Lloyd's team for what purpose??  

David also seems to agree with you that they must have had some type of routing before buying the property, or you with him, which is fine, but why do you think Merion waited seven months to have their soil tested if a design had already taken place?

If everything was designed up and ready to go in the last half of 1910, why would they wait til February to even find out if the land was suitable?

Merion also signed a five-year lease on their existing property during this time, with a 90-day out, and ended up using the original course for another year after Merion East opened.   What does that knowledge tell you about the timeframes in question?

Wouldn't CBM's somewhat cautionary go-ahead that they could indeed build a first-class course on the property in July 1910 be the green-light they needed to buy?   Why have him over to inspect the property even ask him the question otherwise?   Since he recommended a course of 6,000 yards and Merion built one of 6,400 yards, saying they'd need "nearly 120 acres" after Connell told them he'd give them "100 acres, or whatever was needed", do you wonder if perhaps all Macdonald saw was the supposed 100 acres HDC was offering?  

Perhaps Merion just built in 20% to ensure they'd have enough room in the minds, based on CBM's recommendations?  

After all, Macdonald at first thought at NGLA that he'd only be using about 110 acres of the roughly 200 he purchased for the golf course and that property had much more challenge in terms of swampland and thickets of rough ground than Merion's open farmland.

David,

Speaking of "red herrings", your hypothetical to Jeff isn't based on any premises that reflects the reality of the situation.

Merion didn't squeeze themselves into that land purchase without giving themselves options.

Lloyd bought the entire 161 acres, and not only the agreed upon 117 in December 1910 because no routing existed yet.   

Also, Wilson tells us that half the property was covered with fine grasses and half had been used for planting corn, so I doubt they'd find the land wholly unsuitable and non-fertile for their needs.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

I'm thinking we need to revisit this article...

After introducing the committee, and telling us about his role on it, WHO do you think Francis is referring to as "WE", as in "we thought Ardmore Avenue would make a fine hazard" on holes 10, 11, & 12, as part of getting the first 13 holes fairly easily routed, or as in "we had some property west of the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout"?

If Francis was out early with Lloyd working on CBM's hypothetical golf course routing, before WIlson's committee was formed, then why do you think he doesn't mention Macdonald at all in his accounting of events, and why do you think he seems to assign to the Committee tasks that are design-oriented?

After all, this was for a national publication in the 1950 US Open Program, not some internal Merion memo.

Why would he give Wilson clear credit for the creation of the redan 3rd hole, and not CBM?

Do you think it's possible that Francis was "added" to the Committee sometime after it was formed, and not at inception?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Okay, now I am really confused here.  Francis DOES appear to say his brainstorm was in the middle of the night, doesn't he?  What am I missing pre-coffee?

David,

I guess I am not going into this again, because of personal time constraints.  I did review some of the posts on this thread and will again say that I understand the IDEA of having done some preliminary routings, but I keep going back to what was written in first person accounts, which suggest it wasn't, as logical as it seems 100 years later.  Among those that caught my eye were the Evans letter (TePaul's posting follows) which says the accept the offer and will form a corporation, and then "immediately proceed to lay off (out) a golf course and build it."  If that is what they said, I have no reason to believe that a multitude of their correspondance is wrong, just because it doesn't make sense to you or us.

Here is MCC's president Allen Evan's Nov. 15, 1910 letter responding to HDC secretary Nickolsen's Nov. 10, 1910 letter to the Board of Governors of MCC making the offer for the amount of land, the price and the terms given in Nickolsen's letter. This would complete the agreement between the two parties that would move forward over the next 8 1/2 months and culminate in Lloyd transfering 120.1 acres of land to the MCCGA Corporation of which he was the president and at the same time a lease was instituted between MCC and MCCGA Corporation for all the land of Merion East that would remain in effect until 1942.


"E.W. Nicholson, Esq.,
Secretary of the Haverford Development Co.,802 Land Title Bldg., Philada

Dear Sir:

Your letter of November tenth, advising of the purchase of certain tracts of ground on College and Ardmore Avenues, Haverford, by the Haverford Development Company, has been received.  I note that you agree to sell a tract of one hundred and seventeen (117) acres, as agreed upon with Mr. Lloyd, to a corporation to be formed on behalf of the Merion Cricket Club, for the purpose of establishing Golf Links thereon within reasonable time, clear of encumbrance, for the price or sum of Eighty-five thousand dollars, ($85,000.00), payable in cash on or about December 10th, 1910.

In accordance with instructions given me by the Board of Government of the Merion Cricket Club, I beg to state that a Corporation will be formed on behalf of the Club, which will purchase the tract of land above mentioned one hundred and seventeen (117) acres, at the price or sum of Eighty-five thousand dollars ($85,000.00), in accordance with the terms of your proposition, as quoted above, and that as soon as this Corporation obtains possession of the property, we will at once proceed to lay off, and put in shape a Golf Links.

Very truly yours,
(signed) Allen Evans,
President Merion C.C."

I hate to admit I lay in bed thinking about this, but I have, and IF the dramatic Francis  ride story is true, I believe it had to have happened on a night where there was some kind of game changing deadline to cause Francis to distrube Lloyd in the middle of the night.  (BTW, in looking at the tribute dinner invite for Wilson after the course opening, I noticed that Lloyd is STILL the first mentioned member of the committee, giving me the impression that he always top dog...Wilson is listed second and Francis fourth, if that gives any status indication, even though the tribute dinner is mostly for Wilson and all his hard work)  That Lloyd appears to have been the alpha dog, I surmise Francis might have gone to him even after the committed formed for the really big questions, like land swaps, or adding land, but again, that is my speculation based on snippets in the record.

That said, IF your version is correct, AND taking into account my deadline contention, I think the ONLY time frame for Francis to have made the land swap would have been just a few days before the Nov 10 letter and Nov 15 map, thus accounting for the urgency of the story.  And, while they both agreed, there wouldn't have been any time to get the map finalized.  I am not sure if the weather that week 100 years ago was fair or foul but he made the ride.

But again, since so much of the actual record from the first person participants indicates the routing work took place starting in 1911, I am not sure I can buy that.  In the end, as Jim Sullivan suggests, moving routing back to the March meeting with CBM enhances his involvement, while Francis and Co. having brainstorms between CBM visits reduces his input.  As such, I am not sure how this squares with your contention CBM needs more credit, but I am not sure I care about that! 

In the end, absent any other documents, we may never narrow down the actual date of Francis idea.  Even if we did, I suspect this group would start trying to narrow it down to the hour and minute, and whether they drank coco or brandy whilst discussing the land swap, etc., whether they were in their jammies or street clothes, and whether Lloyds loyal dogs laid nearby, or whethter he had a cat which jumped up on the table, and happend to cough out a fur ball right where the 15th green ended up, thus being the TRUE designer of Merion.

[JESII]

Jeff,

Seriously?

It would have been brandy...and two english spaniels.

Lloyd having cats? Ha!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

Yes, even if this is a cat fight, I suspect those Merion guys were all dog people.

The most serious part of the post, as you know, is the idea that I initially thought David's CBM contentions and timeline was plausible, but somewhere around page 50 of the 115 page thread, when more and more first person documents were revealed, I simply decided that most of the arguments we were making relied on our "personal logic" rather than historic review of documents.

Some of that is necessary, of course, but I think we have all done far too much of that.  We don't think its logical to buy 120 acres without a routing, but it actually still happens today (with 160-200 acres being a more normal purchase) and if 20% extra - like 192-240 were bought, who would have any qualms about buying that before a routing?)

But there I go again, adding in my personal experience, logic, and speculation.  It may not be any better than anyone else's.  The record shows they did what they did.  I do agree that reporting on a routing in April means it was done earlier, but blank maps and letters in November saying they will form a corporation and immediately get started in December suggest exactly what the really did, logical to us or not, no?

[JESII]

Yes, logical...but equally logical would be for HDC to want these guys out there planning their course as soon as a verbal committment were made, no? It appears the verbal committment would have been made in early July.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

You miss my point....

What is more likely to reflect THEIR ACTUAL HISTORY - THEIR WRITTEN HISTORY or OUR LOGIC 100 YEARS LATER?

[JESII]

Jim,

Please tell me which points you see as speculative, and we can discuss them.

Mike,

I think the majority of it is speculation but I would prefer to discuss one item at a time and your hypothetical routing that would fit in the original triangle is interesting to me.

Yes, I think your suggestion would haved been very logical and realistic. It also goes to my questions from 10 pages ago about the length of carries on 16 - 17 - 18. Shot testing was a big deal in those days and the ability to carry the quarry on 16 in two shots would have been a major seperator, just like Hells Half Acre. If a player couldn't carry it and wanted an easier option, they could sacrifice most of a shot by laing right to the edge of the quarry, at which point a carry of 110 yards is all that's required. I asked about 17 and 18 vecause they don't offer that same layup option...they are forced 150+ carries I believe...not very accomodating to the players you are suggesting were accomodated by the Francis Swap.

So, if your routing could have worked on 11/15/1910, what was the problem?

[JESII]

Jim,

You miss my point....

What is more likely to reflect THEIR ACTUAL HISTORY - THEIR WRITTEN HISTORY or OUR LOGIC 100 YEARS LATER?

No, I think I get it...but if their history painted a clear picture we wouldn't be here, would we?

[Mike Cirba]

Mike,

I think the majority of it is speculation but I would prefer to discuss one item at a time and your hypothetical routing that would fit in the original triangle is interesting to me.

Yes, I think your suggestion would haved been very logical and realistic. It also goes to my questions from 10 pages ago about the length of carries on 16 - 17 - 18. Shot testing was a big deal in those days and the ability to carry the quarry on 16 in two shots would have been a major seperator, just like Hells Half Acre. If a player couldn't carry it and wanted an easier option, they could sacrifice most of a shot by laing right to the edge of the quarry, at which point a carry of 110 yards is all that's required. I asked about 17 and 18 vecause they don't offer that same layup option...they are forced 150+ carries I believe...not very accomodating to the players you are suggesting were accomodated by the Francis Swap.

So, if your routing could have worked on 11/15/1910, what was the problem?



Jim,

I thought I answered that question fairly well by providing pics of the 17th and 18 holes back then showing that although 17 was a long carry to the green, it was dramatically downhill and there was playable turf well short of the green...not like today where it's kept as almost all high fescue.  

Once they made the design decision to go "inside" the quarry on 17, they had to get out somehow, and the tee shot on 18 had to be daunting, no question.   But, they didn't see fit to create some easier route, simply because they didn't have enough room left of there to go around, nor is that landform very conducive to the purpose.    So, I would guess they simply said, "hey, it's the final hole...deal with it".  

However, although your option of just chipping the second shot 80 yards on 16 is technically viable...as I guess chipping the drive on 18 80 yards closer to would be technically viable, I think they didn't see that as very scintillating or sound golf.

So, whether we question whether they HAD to create the alternate fairway for 16, the fact is they made a design decision to do so, and that to me is what i believe cause the width not to fit, why they needed to push out the 14th green and 15th hole further to the west, why they needed to buy an additional 3 acres, and why Francis figured it all out with a reconfiguration of the road that widened the northern side by borrowing from what they had down by the clubhouse that they weren't using for golf holes anyway.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,

Thanks for your response.

First, I don't see anything inconsistent with that Evans letter and what I propose.    There is a big difference between figuring out whether the course would fit on a map or preliminary plan, and "laying off" and putting the course in shape on the ground.  Take another look at Lesley's Report from July 1, 1910 and you'll see that time was of the essence for HDC, and that this segment of Evan's letter was accepting the condition that they proceed "at once" to create the golf course once they had possession of the land.

Second, and most importantly, you don't seem to have answered my questions.   Here again is what we are being asked to believe:
-- In November 1910 - almost six months after CBM wrote he would need a contour map to see if the course would fit - Merion agreed to buy 117 acres even though they hadn't even bothered to follow up with CBM or to come up with their own workable routing on their own.  
-- No routing - not even a rough one - was necessary because (while most of the border locked MCC in place) MCC had wiggle room to tweak the west border above Ardmore Avenue a few yards here or there.  

Without a routing in place how could they know that this single accommodation would give them enough flexibility to guarantee that their yet-to-be-determined routing would work at all, much less give them a first class course?  

Why would they have boxed themselves into such a narrow swath of land without a routing?  And what would have happened if just about every square inch of that land (plus some more) hadn't turned out to be usuable?

For example, let's say hypothetically that the lease of the 3 acres of RR land (the site of the 13th hole and a big chunk of the 12th) couldn't be worked out.  Or if the quarry turned out to be unusable for golf?

A tweak here or there along the approximate road would NOT solve any other major routing issue, would it?

________________________________________

Jeff and Jim,

Surely the two of you understood my point about Francis not necessarily being out working on the golf course, but rather looking at maps, in 1910, so I'll leave it at that.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Wilson told us that half the land was covered in fine grasses and half was planted for corn.   What could have possibly made that 120 acres unfit for golf?   Three of the holes didn't even need to be replanted to be playable for golf.   I doubt they were going to dig up industrial or radioactive waste on the former farm once they started harrowing.   

Besides, Merion didn't hamstring themselves into just the 117 acres they secured in November 1910.   Instead, they had Lloyd purchase the entire 161 acres in December 1910, because they hadn't configured the course yet.

Hope that helps.

[Jeff_Brauer]

No, I think I get it...but if their history painted a clear picture we wouldn't be here, would we?
Jim,

What is not clear about "as soon as this Corporation obtains possession of the property, we will at once proceed to lay off, and put in shape a Golf Links"?.

David,

See above and my earlier posts. I agree that it might have been logical to have done some routings. I just don't see anything other than your connecting the dots in your own way in the historical record to support the notion.

Back to my logic (since you asked) I think there is a difference in the broad swaths of gently rolling land across Ardmore and the quarry/clubhouse/golf house road land.  All that was necessary was to see if they could get 2 or 4 holes wide across Ardmore.  That they couldn't figure out how to NOT cross the road might even further suggest no routing had been done.  On the other side, they had to work around the Quarry and Clubhouse among other things.

But again, it might have happened that way, IF a lot of stuff happened to happen.  I don't see it in the record, so I tend to believe it didn't happen the way you suggest.  Your argument/theory depends about 90% on YOUR interpretation of all the things that might have happened.  To do that, you need to (IMHO) ignore certain things the record did say happened, or downgrade their importance, to make your theory fit.

So, I am not discounting that your theory is possibly close to what happened entirely.  Once again, I think we would all like some new documents first source type.  Otherwise, what is the point of any of us asking the same old questions.  I laughed to myself last night that my Tombstone will read "He participated on the Merion Threads.....Right up until his death!"  

[JESII]

No, I think I get it...but if their history painted a clear picture we wouldn't be here, would we?
Jim,

What is not clear about "as soon as this Corporation obtains possession of the property, we will at once proceed to lay off, and put in shape a Golf Links"?.

Only the "lay off" and "put in shape" parts...sorry, but you asked.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

Lay off is hopefully a tyop and both could be the words of someone who had never even thought what phrasing is appropriate for golf course design and building.

Are you now suggesting that "put in shape" means the course had been built by November and only needed some grass to grow?   I think we all know that is not true!

[JESII]

"Jim,

I thought I answered that question fairly well by providing pics of the 17th and 18 holes back then showing that although 17 was a long carry to the green, it was dramatically downhill and there was playable turf well short of the green...not like today where it's kept as almost all high fescue.

Once they made the design decision to go "inside" the quarry on 17, they had to get out somehow, and the tee shot on 18 had to be daunting, no question.   But, they didn't see fit to create some easier route, simply because they didn't have enough room left of there to go around, nor is that landform very conducive to the purpose.    So, I would guess they simply said, "hey, it's the final hole...deal with it".  



Mike,

I know you answered it, but "deal with it"

The fact is, #16 has the shortest forced carry of the three which greatly reduces the likelyhood of your theory...IMO.    

[JESII]

Jim,

Lay off is hopefully a tyop and both could be the words of someone who had never even thought what phrasing is appropriate for golf course design and building.

Are you now suggesting that "put in shape" means the course had been built by November and only needed some grass to grow?   I think we all know that is not true!

Nope, not trying to be obtuse, it's just a question of what was yet to be done...in my opinion it could just as easily be to design up the course as it could be to find, route and design and build the course.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

How do you square your opinion that they had the routing started or done with the official records that place the completion of that work in March to go to CBM and April when CBM came back?

[JESII]

Jeff,

I think they took different variations on the same theme to CBM because of the use of "lay outs" and "plans" in the plural and "course" in the singular. Tom P thinks the singular "course" just means the whole property, which I can understand but disagree with.

I think once they traded for the land up in that triangle they would have been fudging with different distances and specific hole designs.

I asked several pages ago, and it was disregarded, if the swap and the purchase of 3 additional acres could have been two wholly different events and circumstances.

As you know, just the presence of the land that currently holds the 15th green and 16th tee (and nothing else I might add...) on the November Map tells me Francis' swap happened prior to that. And your suggestion that the map could have been drawn before they really knew how much width they would need up there makes sense to me. Once they got into the ground and building the holes (and shrink-wrapping the road to it) they would realize the need for a little width here and a little less there.

In the end they used more than 117 and paid retail for the extra 3...$2,500 each.

[Mike Cirba]

The fact is, #16 has the shortest forced carry of the three which greatly reduces the likelyhood of your theory...IMO.
   


Jim,

That's just not an accurate understanding, IMO.    

From inception, 16 was a 430 yard par four, a brute in the time of hickory, I'm sure.

Your idea that someone standing out there with a 180-200 yard approach could simply chip it 80 yards, and then leave themselves with a 100-120 yard carry from the mouth of the quarry is technically accurate, but functionally bad golf design.

Someone standing on the tee at 18 with a 170 yard carry could have done the same thing essentially at the time that quarry was "clean as the Dutch Wife's kitchen), playing a wedge off the tee and leaving another wedge shot out, but that's pretty dumb, as well.

Bottom line is we know they felt the need to create alternate fairway for their members on 16, and they didn't choose to do that at 18.     Where exactly would they have created one on 18, anyway?  

Once they decided to almost double the effective width of the 16th hole, I believe it brought other issues into play, which I think they solved with Francis.

[JESII]

Mike,

Why couldn't the same people you think would choose to hit it into the quarry on 18 do so on 16?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()