[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I think I may have inadvertently answered your second question with my post that just crossed, in terms of Lloyd's fiduciary role, and why he was the "go to" guy in terms of land acquisition issues.   Certainly I think Francis just wanted to check with Lloyd first as to the feasibility of his idea from a contractual basis, wondering perhaps if there was any reason related to the HDC agreement that they couldn't do a little swap.

As relates to your first question, I don't think it was the road that was the obstacle.   That road didn't exist yet, except in theory.

I think it was the fact that they were working within a constraint of 117 acres that they had secured, and there was no way to make that fit the golf course they were finding themselves needing/wanting, especially once they had to almost double the effective width of the 16th hole to fit in an alternate fairway around the quarry.   I think that pushed the 14th green and most of the 15th hole further left than they originally thought.

I'm thinking they did draw some theoretical border on their topo map to signify where that 117 acres stopped on the western edge, which may or may not have corresponded directly to what Pugh & Hubbard drew to scale for them.   I would think it logical that they would use that map that was commissioned in November...but if memory serves I think Bryan Izatt said that map measured out at 124 acres.   If anyone out there has the ability to measure it, I'd be interested to see if their findings correspond with Bryan's.   Personally, I think they probably used the P&H map, realizing it was drawn a little big, but with the idea to scale it back to 117.

But, in any case, I think even with the "puts" and "gets" along whatever theoretical 117 acre boundary they were working with on their Topo map, they found they needed to purchase 3 acres more of HDC land than they had secured, as well as leasing 3 acres of Railroad land.

I think that curving road was simply an aesthetic feature and it is certainly lovely, and something they wanted to work within the framework of somewhat, as it accomplished lovely curving lines for golf as well as lovely aesthetic considerations for real estate.  


Tom Paul,

I'd agree that post #520 is pretty clear, and will exercise restraint forthwith on additional graphical posts.  

[TEPaul]

"Tom and Mike,
In my thesis, the routing was complete, but the designing up was not even contemplated by the time that map was drawn so there would be no way, or reason, for the triangle to accurately represent the finished product. It's presence alone is what convinces me of the timing of the deal."


Sully:

I understand what you're saying or trying to say.

A routing or routing plan pretty much demarks dimensionally (on the ground or on a map) the lengths and widths of golf holes. What you call "designing up" (particularly bunkering and other man-made architectural features) really doesn't influence the basic lengths and widths of routed holes.

But even given that, your statement above (your thesis?) really does seem to me that you are still attempting to put the "Effect" before the "Cause" and as we all know that is not the way it works in reality.

David Moriarty and perhaps you thinks the "Cause" of the "Effect" (the very existence of the entire triangle on that Nov. 1910 Land Plan) was the Francis fix and the land-swap.

But I think we have now shown pretty clearly that the "Effect" (the very existence of the entire triangle on that Nov. 1910 Land Plan) was dimensionally not even close to what Francis described in that article and what it was in reality (130 yards by 190 yards).

310 yards versus 190 yards is just way too far off and most certainly has nothing to do with any "designing up" phase and pretty much everything to do with the basic "routing" phase.

[JESII]

Couple things Mike;

Your Swap notion didn't touch HDC land so your first explanation doesn't seem to fit. Lloyd being the President of MCCGA Corp is the best rationale for him being the key in March or April, but still doesn't explain ignoring the Chairman of the Committee at that point in time.


The theoretical road HAD to be the obstacle Mike...if gaining the ability to move (reconfigure) it after so long contemplating a solution for the final five holes was the lynchpin to having everything fall into place then they were absolutely viewing the road as a hard border. Remember, the whole idea was to get a golf course in there so that the real estate values would jump. Even saying it was an "approximate road" as opposed to a hypothetical road means they were sure it was going to be close to that route...in the grand scheme of things the current road is very close ot the drawing. You've used the 310 yard number versus the reality of 190 to make it appear like a huge difference...how much of that 310 could they have possibly used for golf? Clearly they were not intiending to have a golf hole all the way up to College Ave because the area is only about 40 yards wide 100 yards South of College.

The key is that they designed the course in this corner of the property to take advantage of better golf features and coincidentally reserved the better land for homes on the higher ground and then they just shrink-wrapped the one flexible boundary to it. The wouldn't have shrink-wrapped the boundary and then tried to build a course within those walls...

[JESII]

Tom,

I disagree completely with your comments comparing the 310 to 190.

All they had to do was let the committee build the holes they wanted and shape the road immediately around it. They would never have taken a golf hole all the way up to College Avenue.

The presence of the triangle strongly implies the Francis Swap happened prior to the map being drawn, but no designing up had been contemplated by then. The engineer would have been instructed to include some width up there and to mark the boundary "approximate".


310 sounds a miles apart from 190, but at 190 the width on the map was only what 40 yards? 30 maybe?

[TEPaul]

"1) If the road was designed with no consideration for a golf course (other than to potentially enclose 117 acres) why did they then view it as such an obstacle in the routing process? They certainly must have seen it as a hard line in the routing if it had them stuck on the last five for so long, right? Afterall, the land they/Lloyd owned went well west of that road and could certainly be used for golf..."


Sully:

I believe the answer to that as well as the actual and factual reality is that the line (on the west---ie the proposed road) they were working with when they tried to route the course in 1911 created dimensions that were simply too narrow to get the 15th green and 16th tee up into where they wanted them. Furthermore, we really don't know what that dimensional line (on the west---ie the proposed road) looked like on the survey contour map (that was not the same thing as that Nov. 1910 Land Plan) they were actually working on and off of. If that line on the west---ie the proposed road really did create dimensions (against the fixed boundary on the east (the MCC/Haverford College boundary) that were too narrow to get #15 green and #16 tee up into and where they now are (as Francis's story suggests), that would've certainly created the obstacle that Francis' idea of a dimensional land swap fixed.

It seems to me that comparing the significant dimensional differences of the way that area was dimensionally on that Nov. 1910 Land Plan to the way it is now and was when that plan went for approval in April 19, 1911 and then immediately into construction (the carving off of the top of the quarry) as a result of the Francis land swap fix tells a very important actual and factual story.

I think that is why it shows WHY the Wilson Committee came to view it as an obstacle as well as why it shows both WHEN and HOW the Wilson Committee was involved in the routing process for Merion East----eg during the winter and spring of 1911 as all the factual MCC records such as that Wilson Report to the Board on April 19, 1911 explains and certainly suggests.

I should add that when Moriarty wrote his essay he was completely unaware of that Wilson Report to the board meeting of April 19, 1911, what it said and the importance of what it said. He was also completely unaware of that all-important April 19, 1911 board meeting and what it said (its minutes) about the approval by the board and consequent land-swap by MCC/MCCGA/Horatio Gates Lloyd of the Francis fix and the importance of what it said both actually and in a timeline significance.

[Mike Cirba]

Couple things Mike;

Your Swap notion didn't touch HDC land so your first explanation doesn't seem to fit. Lloyd being the President of MCCGA Corp is the best rationale for him being the key in March or April, but still doesn't explain ignoring the Chairman of the Committee at that point in time.


The theoretical road HAD to be the obstacle Mike...if gaining the ability to move (reconfigure) it after so long contemplating a solution for the final five holes was the lynchpin to having everything fall into place then they were absolutely viewing the road as a hard border. Remember, the whole idea was to get a golf course in there so that the real estate values would jump. Even saying it was an "approximate road" as opposed to a hypothetical road means they were sure it was going to be close to that route...in the grand scheme of things the current road is very close ot the drawing.


Jim,

I think we're saying almost the same thing two different ways, but coming to separate conclusions about what it means.  

I agree that when they were working out there with their Topo Map they had to have some boundary that they were working within on that western edge, even if not yet formalized, but simply because they wanted to stay within the constraint of the 117 acres they had secured.

As Tom Paul mentioned, that topo map may have been exact to the P&H November 1910 Land Plan, which oddly seems to measure 124 acres, and it may have been one more refined down to 117 acres, but no matter.   The example of what I'm driving at works with both.

Let's say for discussion purposes that they used the 124 acres of the P&H Land Plan as the basis of their property constraints, with the idea that they were going to work it down to the 117 acres secured.   Let's say for argument purposes they thought they gave themselves a little room to play in certain areas, but realized 117 was the goal.

That being said, I'm not sure how you can say "your swap notion didn't touch HDC land"?    The actual course that was built compared to the approximate road boundary drawn on the P&H Land Plan marches all over HDC land up and down the length of it, from the overlap of the first green to the 14th upper fairway and entire green, to the whole left side of the 15th fairway and just left of that green, etc.

Furthermore, at the end of the day, Merion "gave back" land to HDC across the street from the clubhouse ("the area of fine homes along Golf House Road"), as well as gave back the upper end of the triangle, north and west of the northern Haverford College boundary.

These were the land swaps in question, I believe, and after all of the 'puts' and 'gets' along that border, the other complicating matter is that at the end of the day the Committee needed 120 acres, not 117, to make it work.    

That is why the Board needed to approve the purchase of 3 acres additional in April 1911, at a price of $7500, although strangely enough, when the deal was finalized in July of that year, Merion was able to purchase the 120 acres at the $85,000 price they had secured the original 117 secured acres for.  

I guess having Lloyd on both sides of the deal had its advantages.

Tom Paul,

I think it's also fair to point out that when David wrote his essay, he didn't have the advantage of seeing the entire 1950 Richard Francis article, but only those parts transcribed in the Tolhurst and Heilman history books.

Certainly that article provides much of the type of insightful information we're discussing here, from Francis mentioning the committee's role in both laying out and constructing the course, from his being "added" to the committee of Wilson and the others, of Francis talking specifically about the design decisions the committee made (i.e. thinking the road would make a good hazard), to his mention of the purpose and timing of Wilson's trip overseas as well as his claim of Wilson's authorship of the redan hole based on that trip, as well as pointing out some of the more amateurish mistakes they made at first, as well as no mention of CBM's role in the creation of the course, etc..

I would think knowing any and all of those things prior to writing the essay may have caused some appropriate changes, but as I said earlier, based on the evidence he had on hand, his essay made some very understandable assumptions and even a reasonable conclusion.  But, he simply was working with what he had at the time and I think a big step towards getting along would be all of us simply coming to that mutual understanding.

[TEPaul]

Mike:

I think that entire #530 is a very good one and very well explained (I might make one very minor clarification to it later on the subject of what was technically "HDC land" in early 1911 and what wasn't).



You said in the end of Post #530:

"I would think knowing any and all of those things prior to writing the essay may have caused some appropriate changes, but as I said earlier, based on the evidence he had on hand, his essay made some very understandable assumptions and even a reasonable conclusion.  But, he simply was working with what he had at the time and I think a big step towards getting along would be all of us simply coming to that mutual understanding."

 

I agree that given the limited amount of historical factual contemporaneous MCC material he had when he wrote that essay does make it somewhat understandable and perhaps even reasonable as to why and how he came to the assumptions and conclusions he did in "The Missing Faces of Merion."  However, we have a whole lot more of that MCC material now than he had or even we had when he wrote that essay and the fact is, to me anyway, that additional material pretty clearly reflects on those assumptions and conclusions he made in that essay and essentially proves many of them to be historical inaccurate or just plain wrong.

It is my hope that he can somehow find a way to come to admit that as we can admit that we had to search for that material after the fact of his essay because we did not have some of it or all of it we have now when his essay first came out. I hope it is not trite to say or I particularly hope it will not seem critical to say, at this point, but we feel if he had simply come to us first, and come directly to Merion GC and MCC first when he was in his research and writing stage and we could all have gone over his material and his assumptions and conclusions in that essay before he published it, we all could have collaborated together with all the information we now have and avoided all these long and adverserial threads on Merion's history.

I suppose he had his own reasons for wanting to treat us here either adverserially or in some form of "hands-off" manner but that is a separate question and discussion for another day and another place, I hope, if it even needs to be considered anymore.

But I think the ultimate goal was for all of us to get to the most accurate factual interpretation and presentation of Merion's architectural history with all the supporting material we now have and I believe we have done that now given the full extent of the information that has now been revealed.

[JESII]

Mike,

It wasn't HDC land, it was Lloyd's...that's why the swap wouldn't/couldn't have impacted HDC directly.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I'm forgetting exactly all the real estate dealings, but wasn't Lloyd really buying the 161 acres (the 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate) with the understanding that whatever Merion didn't buy outright he'd roll back into HDC holdings?   Also, as you pointed out, Merion did not want to buy more land than they needed, and targeted 117, which combined with the 3 acres of leased RR land M&W had possibly recommended made a nice even 120, which is precisely what they estimated they thought they'd need back in July 1910.

I'm sure Tom has more info, but I think Lloyd just grabbed it so nobody else did until they could figure out the details.

This was the Site Committee's report to the Board in July 1910 that references the 120 acres;




Further, Mr. Lloyd had already represented to the membership in a Stock solicitation that the club would only be buying 117 acres, leaving the remainder for real estate.   As I'm sure Francis' request for the Land Swap required the purchase instead of 120 acres, he would need Lloyd's direct approval, both as an officer of MCCGC as well as his role within HDC.

Note also that Lloyd refers to the accompanying letter as a "circular letter", as well, and not an Annual Report or report of any kind.




Consistently, Hugh Wilson, in his first letter to Piper & Oakley in February 1911, mentions in the first paragraph that they purchased 117 acres. 

It only became 120 later that year with the Francis Land Swap.

[TEPaul]

"I'm forgetting exactly all the real estate dealings, but wasn't Lloyd really buying the 161 acres (the 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate) with the understanding that whatever Merion didn't buy outright he'd roll back into HDC holdings?"



That's true. Land not needed for the golf course of the 161 acres Lloyd owned as of Dec. 19, 1910 was rolled back into the eventual residential development to the west. The reason Lloyd could do it that way was he and a few of his fellow members from MCC had arranged earilier for the right to recapitalize HDC so that approximately half of HDC's residential real estate value could be offered to Merion members and friends. At that point----Nov-Dec 1910 Lloyd effectively controlled about half the stock and value of HDC. And we should not forget that simultaneously Lloyd was in the process of creating a 125 acre estate for himself, Allgates, not on HDC land but directly across the street (Cooperstown Road).

Essentially, this kind of club, massive estates, and supplemental highly attractive residential developments et al from the men in and around the Pennsylvania RR Corporation was the way the app 50,000 acre so-called "Main Line" (formerly the so-called "Welsh Tract") from the 1880s to the 1930s came to be the way it basically is today. Many of those old massive estates (acreage-wise) have been chopped up and are gone now (some even to golf courses such as St Davids) but to a large extent many of those old courses and clubs that were a product of that 50 year development of the Main Line via the men in and around the Pennsylvania RR Corporation are still around and going strong. (I believe I may be able to document that around the turn of the 20th century, The Pennsylvania RR Corporation, had the largest stock capitalization value in the history of the world!)

And now I have to write some Green Committee meeting minutes and get on over to a Green Committee meeting at one of those clubs and courses of the Main Line that still is around and going strong!

Thank you Pennsylvania RR Corporation! You did good, for sure, at least in your old days!  

Matter of fact, there is an age-old adage around the Main Line that has been mentioned and spoken about for many, many years----and that is that "Those Peoples'" primary allegiances in life went like this-----first and foremost to the Pennsylvania RR Corporation, then to their God, then to their Country, and then to their State and finally and last, at least when it comes to "primary allegiances," to their City, Philadelphia, the so-called "City of Brotherly Love!" And I am living testimony to the fact that their allegiance to their wives and their children and grandchildren and such was right around 47th!  

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I've added to the post above you just referred to.   Could you cross-check it for accuracy?   Thanks.

[JESII]

Tom and Mike,

I think you'll agree that whenever the SWAP occurred, it was not with HDC but rather on the Johnson Farm land which Lloyd took title to in December 1910 until July 1911...likely after several months of efforts to obtain it from...his friends at the Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Company...it wasn't HDC, and there wasn't a risk of someone else snapping it up.


On that Wilson letter...isn't it interesting that he sayd "Merion "Golf" Club have purchased..."?


Mike,

Why would they have created a hard border with that "approximate road" before thinking of the golf course? 117 acres could take on an infinite number of forms...even if you lock them over to this corner of the total property.  Why would they have viewed this as a hard border?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Per Jeff Brauer's original theory, I don't think it was a hard boundary per se, but more of a working boundary along the desired theoretical curving road, much as depicted in that Land Plan, although without their topo we can't know for sure.

I think the main reason he went to Lloyd is because after looking at the map for some time, and then having his brainstorm and then probably cross checking his numbers after all of the puts and gets along that boundary, he realized he needed 120 acres, not the 117 the club and Lloyd had previously committed to and represented in their stock solicitation offering.

He had to make sure that would work for Lloyd in his dealings both as President of MCCGC, as well as in his role of major and possibly majority stockholder within HDC at the time.  Lloyd had constituencies to satisfy on both sides of the deal, and another 3 acres was not insubstantial. 

[JESII]

Mike,

If it was a working boundary, how could it have caused such problems?

Are you also saying that the 11/15/1910 Map was 117 acres? Or that they used something matching ti for 6 more months that had the wrong acreage represented?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

It caused such problems because after they routed their course in the best configuration, it measured at 120 acres, not the 117 Merion had previously secured at a fixed price, and not the 117 that Lloyd had represented to members and investors.

As far as the Nov 1910 Land Plan, I recall Bryan measuring it at around 124 acres.  If Bryan is reading, or if anyone else wants to take a stab at it, I'd certainly appreciate it and would be keenly interested in the results.

In any case, we know from the circular letter that it was supposed to represent the 117 acres Merion secured at that time.

Whether Wilson's committee created another scale map with different dimensions and enclosures I don't know and can only speculate. 

However, given that we know they had a topo map by 2/1/1911 I would suggest whatever border was on that map was the relevant one.

Further, we know from every account that Merion secured (and then Lloyd bought that and more) 117 acres in Nov/Dec 1910, we know that Wilson was still working with 117 in Feb 1911, and we know they needed 3 acres additional for purchase by April 1911.

Another three acres was subsequently leased from the railroad, making their total course 123 acres at opening.

Other speculative factors that may have driven a harder boundary may have been any activity on the HDC side, such as proposed sub-divisions of lots, or any public offerings they may have made by that time.

Hope that helps.

[Mike Cirba]

Also Jim...I'd again suggest that for aesthetic reasons for both golf and real estate considerations, a gently curving road was desirable as indicated by the parallel road within the HDC land that I believe was built much more to original spec than was Golf House Road.

Your earlier suggestion that you thought it was designed that way to mirror the golf course boundary only makes sense when viewed from the air, and in 1916 I don't think this was a big consideration, except maybe to the Space Aliens who designed the course in the second half of 1910. 

Sorry...couldn't resist that one.  .

[JESII]

Not much Mike, but I'm a dick...


Your first paragraph suggests that there wasn't actually any trouble routing the course up through the last five...it was that once routed they had to figure out if and how to get 3 more acres...doesn't seem likely considering all the friendships on both sides, and the goal of getting a course approved to go in there before the real estate started selling.

My recollection is that the 117 was the result of a string of conversations/events...
1 - HDC offered 100 acres of the Johnson Farm land.
2 - The club decided they needed 120 for any number of reasons
3 - The railroad land was going to be acquired differently than the rest so it was subtracted from the 120 target number.
The 117 was never identified by location at all, was it?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

The Nov circular letter refers to the area in green as the 117 acres secured by the club.

I'm not at a computer right now but I have a 1913 map I'll post later that shows the residential curving road built to original spec while the golf course side road shows the bulges and adjustments based on what I think was the Francis acquistion, because at the end of the day it was not a straight swap.

If that road was designed strictly to mirror the golf course road, why didn't they make similar adjustments to reflect the deviations in the original Nov 1910 land plan?  Instead, only the Golf House Road is considerably misshapen from the original spec.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

My recollection is that the 117 was the result of a string of conversations/events...
1 - HDC offered 100 acres of the Johnson Farm land.
2 - The club decided they needed 120 for any number of reasons
3 - The railroad land was going to be acquired differently than the rest so it was subtracted from the 120 target number.
The 117 was never identified by location at all, was it?

You are basically correct, except that they knew early that the other side of Ardmore was going to be used for golf for any number of reasons (most likely the difficulty of getting utilities over there, but that is a guess).

They also knew they were going to put the golf course against the railroad, if for no other reason than to use existing structures and the creek for golf (which is why CBM suggested the railroad 3 acres)

The only boundary left to flex to get to the desired 117 was the "golf house road boundary." And, that is exactly why it was "approximate" in Nov 1910 - because they didn't know exactly how to configure it until the routing was started.

The argument is simple really.  The road was either an approximate depiction based on already settled boundaries and one flexible one, or it was drawn after some routing work was done.  I can see either side being a possibility, other than the record showing that the routings were done in March-April 1911 and no mention of such prior to that.  Presuming that routing took place earlier means you either need to:

* interpret the official record (as DM is prone to do in some cases, but not others, as fits his needs)
* assume that learned men would do work on a property that was not yet theirs, and in fact, in which they had not yet voted to acquire.

As you say, they had a lot of debate about 6000 vs 6200 yards and the amount of land required to build 6200 yards (against CBM's advice) and decided 120 was it. That was as far as they got and used that number to establish the acreage to buy from the friendly HDC, recognizing that extra land might be needed, and making provisions for that (at a higher price per acre)  If the routing had been fixed, there would be no need to establish that provision, eh?

After securing the land option, they formed committees, they routed, they got design and agronomic advice and started construction, as their agreement obligated them to do.  It all makes perfect sense to me.

As to the "why delineate property" argument, I think we have to remember the logic above in my post, and that golf course routing wasn't as sophisticated then as now.  Not to mention it was a friendly deal where the lines could swap.

I thought I could agree with you (and David) for a while, until CBM's letter came back so general, and the later record shows when the routings were actually conceptualized and finalized.  Add in the memory that the blasting took place the next day and it seems clear, at least to me.

[JESII]

Mike,

I remember that 1913 image of the "other" road in there...it's an interesting point, and dilemna for me...

My suggestion is that the "approximate" Golf House Rd, on that circular, was the result of the golf course having a basic stick routing complete. This showed the hole lengths, but gave almost no representation of the width that would ultimately be required. In that context, the person drawing the road in the engineers office would have been told to start at College avenue and create a winding road that produced some width in that early (North) portion. At the same time, it is very likely that engineer would have been instructed to draw another road to the west and symetry just makes sense. Once Golf House Rd. was formally changed, what would have been the reason to change the other one? Please the Space Aliens?

Does the idea of a basic stick routing help explain how Golf House Rd. could need to be so re-worked after they had completed the entire routing process (which includes width)? This perfectly syncs with the Cuyler letter in December about the course location not being finalized and the best thing to do would be to have Lloyd take the course in his name so boundaries could be moved with no issue.

[JESII]

Thanks Jeff,

Two quick comments.

I don't think CBM had much to do with the routing...I see it as possible that in June 1910 he suggested a general direction around the property, but the vague nature of his letter tells me the same as you, that he was hands off, but wishing them luck. I think what became the committee was doing the routing work in the late summer and fall of 1910. I realized this morning that I may be misusing the word routing...I'm referring to a very basic stick routing with no regard for the amount of width needed for a hole, just the lengths.

Secondly, where does it actually say the routing work was done in March / April? I think Wilson's first report (March 1911) was vague enough about what had been done up to that poiint that he was just summarizing everything that had happened up to that point.

Yes, I think these learned men were out working on the property before it was theirs. That may be my glaring ommission/false presumption in this, but the owner at that point would have been highly motivated for them to come up with a golf course to put on it so I think he may have kept the dogs locked up...

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

The only problem with that is the fact that neither road was actually built until months later, so should have reflected any field adjustments.

As far as the stick routing, I'd have to disagree, because I think the problem they were trying to resolve involved the width needed around the quarry.   Francis' quandary was how to fit the final holes, so are you suggesting they always knew they'd want to golf up in that area prior to Nov 1910 but that he created his swap/acquisition sometime later when they were actually trying to make it work on the ground?

[JESII]

Mike,

I've never had alot of faith in the quarry issue you've developed.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Yet that is precisely where the gets were needed and acquired in terms of deviating from the original Land Plan...it pushed out the 14th green and the whole left side of 15, and if you recall, the 15th tee was originally placed up beyond the left side of the 14th green. Right along the road.

What runs along most of that?  The alternate 16th fairway.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

I am going from my memory of how I came to the Philly side of the argument.  At one point, I even think we discussed how much work would get done over Xmas 1910 in this kind of a crowd, and whether anyone would go out and wander the property while the sales price was still being discussed.  Then as now, letting someone know your intentions to buy usually does nothing but drive the price up - we know from the record that it was a hot real estate area.

So, yes, after the votes were tallied on (I think) Dec. 16, 1910 they probably immediately started to think about the committee.  But, again, how much work would be done heading into Xmas?

I agree with you that the Quarry wasn't the real issue.  It was (IMHO) that the approximate line didn't really consider either the length or width of golf holes from a golf perspective.  

Golf land needs to be either two or four holes wide.  It was about 3 holes wide at the clubhouse, which did little good.  The triangle was less than two holes wide, which did little good.  

As to length, a few of us started plotting holes up to that squared off Haverford College boundary.  It was too short and the Quarry didn't help.  In essence, the length of golf land parcels needs to be in multiples of 370-400 yards to fit in decent holes, too, considering par 3 and par 5 holes to balance.  MCC needed 3 holes up and 3 holes back to fit the course in on that parcel.  Ending at the Haverford line simply wasn't enough length to do it.

They needed the triangle, but needed it reshaped - wider to fit two holes, but not that long - the 16th was originally a par 5 but couldn't be too much longer in those days to allow the gamble to carry the quarry for the green.

I think we also might consider that the story was made a little more dramatic than actually happened.  Fitting golf holes is the essence of routing and this doesn't seem like an ephiany to me.  It may have been for Francis, or it may have just been that he was the one who sketched out the final routings of those holes.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()