[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Two more if I might.

The first from 1915 shows that three years after the course opened for play very little bunkering had yet been done.

This seems very strange indeed for a course filled with "template" holes, where indeed the proscribed bunkering patterns on most of them in fact define the strategies;




The other snippet, contrasting some of what Tillinghast wrote about the state of the course for American Cricketer when it opened in 1912 contrasted with a review in American Golfer written by "Far and Sure", tells us who conceived of the problems of the Merion holes;

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

What was your insight you mentioned earlier regarding Francis' 1950 remembrances as relates to the timing of the Land Swap?

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
What was your insight you mentioned earlier regarding Francis' 1950 remembrances as relates to the timing of the Land Swap?"


Mike I. Cirba:

Momentarily I am expecting the excellent New Jersey and Pine Valley deed researcher, Rick Sides and his girlfriend here on the farm. I will get to what I mentioned I think I see in that Francis article as soon as I can. I would like to take it slow and carefully and give it all the study, analysis and consideration I believe it deserves.

Mike, you have done an excellent job today. I really do hope the other two and others if there are any left at this point, will be willing to give all this the very careful attention and consideration it deserves, even if it seems like we have all been over all this stuff before.

I know we have been but from doing this kind of golf architectural analysis regularly for about a dozen years now this is what I know the process to be and what it seems to have to be----eg you just have to go back over some of this old material, particularly aerial photographs and on-grounds too, but also textual material too, and go over it all again and again because you just never know what will and can jump out at you for the first time. This has been my experience for a long time now and believe it or not the one who taught me that best and many years ago now was Geoff Shackelford and he is very good at this kind of thing, perhaps the very best I've ever known. If one with his talent has to do it that way, I'm quite sure the rest of us do too.

[Mike Cirba]

I think this whole thing that has been running for a number of years now and particularly promoted by just two on here really just is an attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill. I go back to what Peter Pallotta said on the only post he made on this thread----eg it just seems like fairly early on those two just got mad at some of us and decided to just dig their heels in and refuse to ever admit to making any analytical mistakes and perhaps to just not ever really admit to the reality of the history of Merion East.



Tom,

I think the term "Peter Principle" applies in more ways than one, and I think we should simply adapt that shorthand here going forward.  

By this I mean I sincerely believe that David got out of his essay a very valid set of assumptions based on the evidence he had at his disposal at that time.   I also sincerely believe he would have gotten more done through collaboration with the folks in Philadelphia and Merion, than passing it by Tommy and Patrick (who know a lot about architecture generally but little about Merion, specifically) but perhaps David felt differently as some conflict had already surfaced by that time, and I fully respect his decision not to, but am also convinced that's why it ultimately doesn't represent an accurate picture of Merion's course origins in many regards.

By "Peter Principle" I simply mean that David's essay rose to the highest level it possibly could, given it's inherent and somewhat self-imposed limitations.

[john_stiles]

Thanks for posting the old articles and letters.

Given the last few years, US Am, Walker Cup, and a future US Open,  is a Merion history project for 2015? in the works ?

[Mike Cirba]

Thanks for posting the old articles and letters.

Given the last few years, US Am, Walker Cup, and a future US Open,  is a Merion history project for 2015? in the works ?

John,

Glad you enjoyed.

As far as your question, you never know.   Don't mean to be vague, but I've heard a few things proposed/discussed and I wouldn't be at all surprised if some things are done in conjunction with the 2013 US Open.

[TEPaul]

John:

There is somethng in the works with the history of Merion even though I don't think it has been specifically determined yet. It may concentrate mostly on the getting of the 2013 US Open, and I don't believe any completely comprehensive new work is contemplated that covers the entire history of Merion including the entire history of its architecture. Wayne Morrison has pretty much written that of late; it may not be completely done at this point but it is very comprehensive----something like 250 pages. Of course as it is updated and heads towards completion it will reside in the Merion archives. On the subject of what Macdonald did it treats that with every known factual bit of evidence that exists that the club (or this website) is at this time aware of.

[JESII]

You guys are tough to keep up with...you ought to slow down and wait for an answer before plowing into 15 more posts each.


Mike,

I don't know why they thought they needed 120, bought 117 and ended up needing 123...and I also don't know why the railroad land wasn't on the November map is the routing was basically complete...but my guesses are:

The 120 was a target number and, knowing they could get 3 acres from the railroad on good terms, they immediately adjusted to 117 and that's what they agreed to and drew. Once they got into building the course they realized they needed 3 more. Seems simple to me for first time guys just putting numbers on the board.



On the timing of the Francis Swap. He was very clearly thinking of a big swath of land west of their course, not these little slices here and there that you and Tom are speculating about because the area is "covered by fine homes". The re-drawing of the road was what, 15 or 20 yards of difference from the map to the current?

Also, why did Francis go to Lloyd for approval at midnight if it was April 1911? Hugh would have undoubtedly made his mark as Chairman by then, but in September or October 1910, they would have all been working together on this and Lloyd was the one running the land acquisition.


All the way back to CBM's letter - can we agree that "the land by the clubhouse" is the 3 acres of railroad land? COnsidering the rest was all Johnson Farm land, this seems like a reasonable agreement...everybody on board with that one? Why else would CBM request that, if not because of the notion of a hole going there that he undoubtedly mentioned to them? The par 3 length's are remarkably similar to his ideal hole length recommendations. Forget the idea of a 6,000 yard course versus the Championship Course they MAY have been trying to build, you don't just stumble into those exact yardages.

Now, on the flip side, the letter is so generic as to leave no doubt that he did not consider himself part of the team...but rather what has always been said, that he was a friendly advisor with somewhat more experience then they had.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Great questions...I'll try to respond comprehensively tomottow, but the question I'll leave both you and Tom to ponder is simplyu;  why do you think the francis swap happened prior to the start of construction once you read his account? 

Btw...wasn't this TMac's thread...I guess he gave up, but I don't think he ever agreed with the literal interp of Francis anyway, although he can certainly weigh in if he chooses.

[TEPaul]

"The re-drawing of the road was what, 15 or 20 yards of difference from the map to the current?"


What map to the current?



"Also, why did Francis go to Lloyd for approval at midnight if it was April 1911? Hugh would have undoubtedly made his mark as Chairman by then, but in September or October 1910, they would have all been working together on this and Lloyd was the one running the land acquisition."


Because Horatio Gates Lloyd owned the land then (since mid December 1910) not Hugh Wilson and not HDC.

[TEPaul]

"All the way back to CBM's letter - can we agree that "the land by the clubhouse" is the 3 acres of railroad land? COnsidering the rest was all Johnson Farm land, this seems like a reasonable agreement...everybody on board with that one?"



I am. I just can't imagine when CBM mentioned that they should get the land around the clubhouse that he could be referring to anything else but that app. 3 acre Philadelphia and Western RR land. I think anyone out there even in June 1910 could see the rest of the land around that Johnson farmhouse (the proposed clubhouse) was Johnson Farm land.





"Why else would CBM request that, if not because of the notion of a hole going there that he undoubtedly mentioned to them?"



I can't really imagine why else CBM would've recommended that in June 1910. I suppose he may've felt they might need to lock it down for protection for the future that close to the clubhouse but I seriously doubt he or anyone else could've worried it would ever be anything but a basic railroad easment even if technically it was never that.

Did you know that apparently Merion thought for years they actually owned that 3 acres? It was not until sometime in the 1970s that my old friend Lew Rawlins who was the president of Merion at the time (he was also the so-called "Ghost" of the Lesley Cup right up until about the time he died (what a great guy Lew was!) realized they were paying rent on it and he asked why. So they looked it up and found out they didn't own it. They then bought it for I think $11,000 which seems ridiculously low.

[TEPaul]

Repeat of the last post.

But since I can't completely delete this one, I might as well use it, and so I will ask both Sully and Professor Cirba if they realize that C.B's speed writing dictationist and speed typing secretary and part time chorus girl and show girl, Patty LaBelle Belle, was actually CBM's inspiration for the Alps hole concept. Yep, some people think it was that hole at Prestwick or whatever but it was actually Patty LaBelle Belle.

It's fairly well documented that Charlie felt that a really well conceived and executed green was like a beautiful face to a person's body. One time  Charlie was taking a nap in his Wall Street office, and somehow he had his head resting in Patty's crotch, and Patty LaBelle Belle apparently had a beautiful face and quite the gigantic rack on her too. When Charlie woke up he went to look into Patty's eyes, and God-damn-it to hell but he couldn't even see her face or head because her gigantic rack was in the way.

That's the real story of how his blind Alps hole concept was born where you can't see the green from anywhere on the approach.

You ask some architecture afficionado what the real conceptual etymology of the Alps hole is and if he tells you it's Patty LaBelle Belle you will then know he is a true expert architectural historian!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Seeing Alan Wilson's account seems to bolster the fact that the primary reason they were looking for a new course site was permanency (i.e., own the land, not lease) and finances.  They were being forced out of their leased land and needed to find a new place, presumably at a reasonable price. I had figured Francis words "antiquated course" meant length or quality, and still think it was a consideration, but it may have been one after the decision was forced on them to move.

So, score one for David Moriarity over JDB and a few others.  The preponderance of evidence suggests he was right on that one.

[JESII]

In an attempt to elaborate on my thesis a little...I suspect the committee were out planning the golf course in the months between July and November and that is when Francis' idea occurred. I suspect it was easy for CBM to point the way around the first 13 holes, but did not have a solution for the last 5 because the 13th green left them in a very difficult position to deal with the quarry. From the 13th green, it would seem sensible to go up that East boundary for #14 and then wrap around the quarry somehow before coming back down to the clubhouse...regardless, I cannot see them spending 8 months messing around on the property before Francis realizes that triangle solution is the best way to utilize that portion of the property for their final 5. Tom and Mike - is it fair to say that you have the Francis Swap nailed down to about a week or two period in March or April 1911?

Add to that the illogic of "buying" that triangle without knowing some golf holes were going there...even if the actual border had to be tweaked as they got into the build up stage... just doesn't sit with me. Do you really think they took 5 completely distinct routings up to CBM in March 1911?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

As I mentioned once, I put forth a similar "unofficially worked on the routing before the official committee" theory and was soundly thrashed by this forum.  It could have happened though.

I also think the west was easier to route, because Barker did give them a routing for that basic parcel in June 1910.  They managed to add the Dallas Estate at some point, perhaps because they had that routing to work with and knew the property configuration made it necessary to get the longer course?

Similarly, the east side may have had a routing, but they knew they had problems, thus the road was specifically labeled "approximate."  But, that suggests the routing wasn't even close to finalized at that point (Nov 1910) but they needed a plan to show the members at the annual meeting.  It could even suggest it hadn't been started at all.

We all have theories, I guess.  And the evidence sometimes suggests nearly every one of them can be shot down! 

[JESII]

Re: the Barker routing...why would it get any legs at all in this conversation? Clearly its existence was simply employed to convince the MCC people that a golf course could be built there...isn't the fact that there is no other discussion of it evidence enough that it didn't add to the project at all?

Jeff,

Explain why the presence of an approximate border that turned out to be extremely close to the final border suggests the routing wasn't even close to finalized. These guys had over 300 acres to look at and that "approximate road" could be moved 15 yards to and from as you go up and down the finished product and hit it on the head...within the context of one guy saying that creating that triangle was his only real contribution, and the fact that the real motivation would have been to take up (Buy) a minimal amount of land, support the notion of the triangle being hatched prior to the map being drawn?

[JESII]

The truth is, the more work was done in March and April 1911, the more involvement CBM had, in my eyes. In June or July 1910 he was clearly hands off but Mike is opining that they went to him in March 1911 without a clue what do and suddenly an epiphany hit them while there...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

I hate to really get involved in this too much more.  All speculation on both or all sides is a waste of time, IMHO< until someone finds some new document.

RE: the Barker Routing, just a guess but it could be way off.  That said, the Barker routing is the only one that got done early.  It was for a parcel of land about 4 holes wide west of Ardmore Ave.  It wouldn't be too hard to fit similar holes in those corridors somehow, and come to the realization that more land in the form of the Dallas Estate was necessary.  I would bet there were some holes used. 

As to the east side, they had an agreement to buy 120 acres.  That road had to connect at both ends where it did to meet existing or logical intersections, and then current land planning theories suggested a curved road, and those three factors made for the prelim design of the road. 

A lot of work could be and was done from Nov. 1910 until the NGLA site visit in March 1911.  Think about it - if you were tasked with a routing plan now, how much work could you get done by December 2010?  A lot, esp since some of the work on topos, land parcels, etc. would have been given to you.

So, why would you suggest that they went to CBM in March without a clue, especially when the record says they went with five plans for CBM to consider and evaluate?

[JESII]

Jeff,

I don't think they went "without a clue" but Mike's comments here seem to suggest they didn't have anything working when they went up. I disagree with this bit of speculation.

Jim,


I think they went up to NGLA in March 1911, mostly to listen, because it seems at that point they had tried "many" layouts, none of which they felt comfortable with, and CBM showed them the ideal holes abroad as well as what he had done with NGLA, and I'm betting they got some better insight and they cajoled him to come back down and look at their revised plans, which he did on April 6th, 1911, and helped them select the best one.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike suggests that they did have the five routings in hand, which I think comes from actual notes from those there.  It also seems from some of the accounts that the purpose of the visit was to see how to "design up" the routing with hole features, not just get the routing fixed.

[TEPaul]

"They were being forced out of their leased land and needed to find a new place,"


Jeffrey:

MCC was not being forced out of their Haverford course because of the end of their lease at all. You seem to imply that the author of "The Missing Faces of Merion" said that in that essay but I can't find it. Maybe he said it on here on some later threads.

In any case, if he said that or implied it in his essay or on a later thread, he is wrong. MCC was not being forced out of their lease of the old Haverford course at all. Matter of fact, they renewed that lease for another five years to terminate in 1915. Apparently the author of that essay did not know that because, once again, he has never been to either Merion GC or MCC to look at their archives.

[JESII]

5 routings...none of which they liked...right?

[Mike Cirba]

Guys,

They had done numerous layouts prior to going to NGLA.

On their return, they came up with five new plans.

Here's the exact language from the MCC Minutes...I'll try to get to the rest later.

"Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different golf courses on the new ground, they went down to the National course with Mr. Macdonald and spent the evening going over his plans and the various data he had gathered abroad in regard to golf courses. The next day we spent on the ground studying the various holes that were copied after the famous ones abroad.”

"On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans."



This begs the obvious question;  if the routing was already done by November 1910, in any form, why would they still be laying out "many different golf courses" prior to their March, 1911 NGLA visit, and then make five separate plan revisions after the visit?

We know they had to be distinct enough that CBM was asked  to come down to Merion to review them and help them choose the best one, which he did on April 6th, 1911.

If they were all just minor variations on the same theme I'm not sure that would have been necessary.

[JESII]

Mike,

I am proposing that "layouts" and "plans" are the same thing. The fact that the word "course" is singular makes me think the routing was pretty firm and they were rearranging the hole lengths.

[TEPaul]

"Re: the Barker routing...why would it get any legs at all in this conversation? Clearly its existence was simply employed to convince the MCC people that a golf course could be built there...isn't the fact that there is no other discussion of it evidence enough that it didn't add to the project at all?"


Sully:

Then why wouldn't the same be true of some theoretical routing by CBM? There is absolutely not a thread of evidence of such a thing nor a thread of evidence of the discussion of such a thing anywhere from that time frame back then (1910 on)! Matter of fact, there is not a shred of evidence of any contact with CBM at all between June 1910 and the first half of March 1911 at NGLA.

I know you all have your "theories" about how there might have been but don't you think the time has come to consider what was probably the reality----ie there just was no contact between him and MCC about the course between June 1910 and March 1911 or perhaps even April 6, 1911? At least that is most certainly what the MCC contemporaneous record (MCC board and committee meeting minutes and supporting correspondences to them, including a corporate structure and deeds et al to affect it etc which most certainly seem to be complete) seems to be suggest.

Maybe the time has come to begin to consider what that really did and does mean.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()