Willie Campbell & Myopia

[Tom MacWood]

Things like how long it would take to put a golf course in play.....do you think they just made that up at the meeting, or came prepared?  What land to use, given the strife between the hunting and new golfing interests?  It wouldn't be hard for most of us to envision that some discussions like that were in play before going to a formal meeting.

And remind me again why it is that I speculate and when you say "the Weeks account reads like fiction" or "It makes no sense that they wouldn't use Campbell" without providing facts is okey dokey?  Do you, like David, just presume that your "logic" is beyond question?  

Its fun and perhaps educational if we keep snooping around to find a scenario that might fit the information we know.  You speculate as much as anyone on this site, but just won't admit it, and don't always agree with mine or others.  There are gaps that need to be filled and in lieu of new documents, we are trying to patch something together here.  Again, it can be fun but when we all get to arguing others points down, that is definitely NOT the same as trying to find new fact.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think of Niall's comment that they already had sheep at Myopia and knew how to clip grass without asking Willie Campbell about it?  Truthfully, I hadn't really thought of that either.

They would have known they could have a golf course up and running in days. TCC and Essex County had laid courses the previous year. Tramping around on the site wasn't going to teach them anything they didn't already know. I think you are projecting 21st C realities on a 19th C project.

"When the snows melted in the spring of 1894...." That reads like fiction. "...probably marking them with pegs." Fiction. The idea that it would take 3 months in 1894 to have a course ready. Fiction. Sodding and cutting the greens. Fiction.

The sheep at Myopia were reported to be on there way in May of 1894 expressly for the golf course, no mention of polo. And the sheep at TCC were imported from New Hampshire, and 'there entire duty of these sheep is to keep the grass short on the links.' Again there is no mention of polo in connection with the sheep.

[TEPaul]

"Mike
You did not know TCC had a 6-hole course in 1893? I have mentioned it on this thread, and more than once. Its also alluded to in my profile of Campbell from my essay on this site. Weeks also mentioned it. Didn't you just transcribe that part of his book the other day? I've also mentioned they were members of TCC on numerous occasions."


I mentioned it the other day but for those interested in a really good and pretty comprehensive account of golf in the beginning and very early days in Boston and amongst these Boston clubs we've been discussing and the people from them and what they did with their golf and courses in the beginning and in the early days (1890s), I don't think you could do much better than perusing this new book entitled "The Story of Golf at The Country Club" (2009) by John de St. Jorre!

This author is so good and so comprehensive on the subject he even has Wayne and I in his "Acknowledgments" section!   

[DMoriarty]

TMacWood,  

TEPaul has already shared plenty about what he knows about these supposed "minutes," so much in fact that the real source of the questionable information has become abundantly clear.    
_______________________________________________

TEPaul,

As much as you would like to have your unsupported proclamations go unchallenged around here, I doubt very much Ran will sign off on any plan to permanently "take care" of your 2 to 5 problems.

But while you are visiting with Ran, perhaps you will explain to him why you tried to dupe us with a phony quote from the Weeks' book and why you have been misrepresenting Myopia's minutes?

And you might as well come clean to him about the supposed Drexel documents, since you will not come clean on the website.
_______________________________

Mike Cirba,

While they reportedly had a "plank lawn tennis court" at the original Winchester location, I have seen no indication that they had lawn tennis at Hamilton in or before 1894.  What is your basis, aside from TEPaul's speculation, for stating they had tennis at Hamilton in 1894.  Did TEPaul claim he saw lawn tennis course in his amorphous Bush minutes?

Also, you repeatedly have speculated about the members having routed the golf course so as to avoid the polo grounds and "traditional hunting grounds."   Was that in the amorphous Bush minutes as well?  

The polo grounds were reportedly north of the club, adjacent to the railroad tracks.  They were connected to but relatively isolated from the main property by the swampy Miles River.  They'd have had to have gone well out of their way for the golf course to interfere with the polo grounds.  

You also apparently suffer from the mistaken impression that they hunted next to the clubhouse on what would have been an extremely limited tract of land.
- First, as neither you nor self-appointed Myopia expert TEPaul seem to realize, they had long given up the actual hunting of live foxes at Hamilton by 1894.   Instead, they had "drags," where a scent trail was laid out and the dogs and horses would follow the "drag" as if it were a hunt.  
- Second, these "hunts" were not limited to the area around the clubhouse (what you christen, laughably, as the "traditional hunting grounds.")  They went on for hours and covered great distances.  Reportedly, while the the early runs went on for three or four miles, by the mid-1890's they oftentimes covered ten miles.  Obviously the runs were not contained to your  "traditional hunting grounds" but ranged over dozens of farms, estates, and even through neighboring towns.  

So this notion that the course was designed to skirt the polo grounds or "historical hunting grounds" is another inaccurate assumption on your part.

[An Aside: The Myopians actively cultivated a good relationship with the neighboring farmers by reportedly hosting them for celebratory days (such as Bunker Hill Day) devoted to games and horse races at the Club, by sponsoring an annual horse show beginning in 1896, and by holding an annual dinner for the farmers at the end of the season, starting in 1890.  There were also reportedly economic incentives.  As one member put it, their altruism was filtered through their own selfishness, or visa versa.]

____________________________________________

Before TEPaul started claiming that the "three months" came for the minutes, he seemed to think the three months was simple math.   Weeks thought they started in March and finished in June, subtract the difference and you get three months. Note that Weeks seems quite impressed that they could get it done even this fast, which may explain why he assumes they must have started around or even before the March meeting.  

Of course, Weeks speculation is contradicted by the multiple contemporaneous reports indicating that the course had not yet been laid out in mid-May, and one report indicated that the course was laid out a matter of days before they began play.   Even Bush noted that it was in such rough condition at the opening that some of the membership objected to even playing on it.

And in 1894 Myopia was a summer and fall club, generally active from around the first of June through the fall.   The March meeting was in Boston.   While Gardner reportedly went to Hamilton in mid-April, he was not even reported to have been on the sub-committee charged with bringing golf to Myopia.  I remember TEPaul mocking something about these guys staying "at the kennels."   Wasn't it reported that a few of the others were expected "at the Kennels" around June 1st?

Yet you guys think that they began working on the course in early March and the work continued until the opening, with Campbell brought in at the very late stages?  And once again Jeff Brauer posits what he thinks happened based on his knowledge of how things are done now?  

Far be it from me to disagree with Jeff Brauer's expertise based on on his experience a century later (and little knowledge of the time period in question,) but from what I have read about this period, these courses were oftentimes put in play almost immediately after they were laid out.

Did it take three months at the Country Club? Nope.  Did it take three months at Essex? Nope. For that matter did it take three months at the Appleton Estate or at others of the Estate courses?  Nope. I was under the impression that they were golfing within days of when these courses were laid out.  Just as was reported at Myopia.    

Yet you guys think that for some unexplained reason, at Myopia they needed three months before they even started playing on their course?  If so it may have been the first of its kind in this regard at least!

As for me, I don't think Weeks understood how short the time usually was between layout and play.   Otherwise why would he have been impressed that it only took three months?   If the minutes really said it would take three months to build the course, that itself would have been revelatory.

_________________________________

Jeff Brauer,

For you to even jokingly defend TEPaul's credibility and integrity at this point speaks volumes about yours.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

Once again, how is your speculation any different than anyone elses?

David,

You might have a point there. I know it was shorter, if only from our experience in discussing Merion.  They started in spring and seeded in fall of 1911.  If I recall, they played that fall on it, about six months after seeding.  I am not quite sure how we can decide that 18 years earlier it would have taken less time.

I do understand it would be possible to open quicker with no construction (they were said to level some greens and tees, although not too much because the greens were reported to have steep slopes and some be too narrow to hit) and no seeding.  If they weren't too much putting green quality, then the limiting factor would be how long it took the sheep to mow the areas that were too rough down to something akin to fairway height.

I suppose now we will have do discuss how much grass a sheep consumes in a day, how many sheep they had in the flock, and how many acres of turf they had, etc. and work back wards from opening day to start of construction.  I guess we know it wouldn't be much more than a month, at least for the trimming operations.

David,

I think you are wrong in your last sentence.  And by the way, how is the sentence above that: "I don't think Weeks understood......" backed up by anything other than "your understanding" of the time period?

I really hate to argue about the irrelevant to Myopia, and am simply pointing out that none of us are working with a full deck here.  No problem when you or TMac disagree, and I understand that.  We could disagree and have fun with this, which is what I intend to do with whatever participation I have in the future on this.  MH is a really speical place, a real museum of 1900 era gca and that is what is worth discussing.

[TEPaul]

"You might have a point there. I know it was shorter, if only from our experience in discussing Merion.  They started in spring and seeded in fall of 1911.  If I recall, they played that fall on it, about six months after seeding.  I am not quite sure how we can decide that 18 years earlier it would have taken less time."


Mr. Jeffrey:

With Merion East, they started on it in the spring of 1911; they seeded it beginning in Sept. 1911 and the club began playing on it in Sept. 1912.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TePaul,


Thanks for that.  Back on topic, do you happen to think it could be that much shorter a time frame 18 years earlier, as TMac suggests?  I know there doesn't appear to be any seeding of grass to "catch" at MH, and once speculated that since it still takes sod 6 weeks to knit in now, it would have taken that then.

Could lesser standards of green construction really allow you to walk on newly laid sod (and transplanted rather than field grown at that) in a few days time?  If so, why after millions in USGA research have we gone so far backwards?

[Tom MacWood]

Jeff
I don't follow you. There are three separate reports that Campbell laid out the golf course; there are no reports that the Squire & Co laid out the course. Willie Campbell laid out the course. That is not speculation. That the Squire & Co had anything to do with laying out the course is entirely speculation. Apples and oranges.

[TEPaul]

"Back on topic, do you happen to think it could be that much shorter a time frame 18 years earlier, as TMac suggests?  I know there doesn't appear to be any seeding of grass to "catch" at MH, and once speculated that since it still takes sod 6 weeks to knit in now, it would have taken that then.

Could lesser standards of green construction really allow you to walk on newly laid sod (and transplanted rather than field grown at that) in a few days time?  If so, why after millions in USGA research have we gone so far backwards?"


Mr. Jeffrey:

Very good and very logical points and questions there!

It does not appear that Myopia did any seeding on that 1894 golf course that first spring. They did sod the greens though. But I very much doubt the greens and green sites they used then had to actually be constructed. I feel they just used natural grades for their green sites, probably just tilled them a bit and sodded right on natural grade. If and when I get you to Myopia I'll show you the 8th and 11th greens which are very likely the only ones left from that 1894 nine and I think you will be able to see what I mean by the above. Matter of fact, many of the greens and green sites Leeds used later seem to be right on natural grade! That's one of the reasons many of them and the golf course is so cool, in my opinion.

Yeah, that is a very good point you made----eg if it took them only a few days to sod greens and play on them, including a couple of tournaments at Myopia in 1894, one really does wonder why modern agronomy and including USGA Green Section research and instruction says it takes or should take so much longer today to sod and then bring into play. I've never heard of any modern course doing that. We just built and sodded a new practice chipping and pitching green at GMGC about three weeks ago and it cannot be used until the spring!   

Do you think this is some kind of 20th century American agronomic business cabal conspiracy to charge golf way more money by stretching everything out? Maybe this is another and far more important century old conspiracy those two super-sleuths and "expert researchers," MacWood and Moriarty have uncovered here on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

I will get my two primary "Grass Whisperers," Scott Anderson and Kyle Harris to go out there and do some whispering with their grass and ask it if it thinks it could be sodded and played on in a couple of days like Myopia may've done in 1894!! And if it says yes then we will know the true and "verifiably provable" story on that.

Do you think MacWood and Moriarty will take on faith the word of my two primary "Grass-Whisperers," Anderson and Harris or do you think MacWood and Moriarty will require some "factual supporting documentation" from the grass-----to be scanned and posted onto this DG by the grass of course?

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

Why do you remind me of Kansas....you keep repeating things like "Theres no place like home, theres no place like home." as if saying it again will make it happen.

We just disagree. I happen to think that you can't dismiss the Weeks report, since TePaul has compared it to the minutes he has seen at Myopia and said that it was clearly and mostly based on those old, contemporaneous records.  I think the full story is somewhere in between the club laid it out and Willie laid it out.  I understand you think I am repeating myself as well and don't care to bore you.

I suggest we all take an Xmas break on this one, and know I will, since so little is to be accomplished.  I also need to take some time away from my "real life" on golfclubatlas.com because I have signed up for some charity work over the last and next few days for Ronald McDonald house.  It strikes me that I shouldn't come back here and argue such minute points when others have so much bigger problems, and am sorry for lessening the holiday tone around here.

[TEPaul]

"TMac,
Why do you remind me of Kansas....you keep repeating things like "Theres no place like home, theres no place like home." as if saying it again will make it happen."



Jeffrey:

That's what Dorothy said to ToTo over and over. He was a dog, for Goll-danged sake and not quick on the uptake, plus ToTo may not have understood Kansan that well. It's possible that's the way Mrs MacWood had to talk to Little Tommy to get through to him and he just got used to it.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff Brauer,

Again with this notion that all analysis, no matter how baseless, must be considered equal?

Tom MacWood's "speculation" is different because it is squarely based upon 1) actual relevant and contemporaneous source material about Campbell and Myopia, and 2) a much greater understanding of the time period in general.  

You compare the process in 1910 - 1912 at Merion East to the process at Myopia in 1894?   Amazing.  Not only do you have your facts wrong about Merion, the two are so far removed from each in the evolution of golf course design that the comparison is beyond inapt.

The process took less time early, because it was common practice to basically just put holes in the ground, roll or cut areas for greens and tees ( in Myopia's case, perhaps sod)  and then play golf! No construction, no seeding, no grow in, no nothing!

And there you go again playing fast and loose with the facts to make your point.  They were said to have leveled some greens in 1894?  By whom?   What is your basis for claiming this?    And you seem to think you know when sheep were introduced?   Based on what?  Reportedly they hadn't yet been introduced as of mid-May, yet you have a date certain?  It took more than a month to lay out the course? Based on what, again?  And what of the multiple reports that they hadn't even started in mid-May?

When I write 'I don't think . . ." then obviously I am speculating.  If I wasn't then I wouldn't qualify my statement with "I don't think . . . "  As I have said before, because Weeks did not provide sources for most of what he wrote, I have no idea why he wrote what he wrote.  But my speculations are based on the source material, in this case that Weeks' was impressed that they could get this done even in three months.   I don't just twist the facts to suit my latest speculation.  See any of your posts, including your latest, for an example of that.  

My idea of "having fun with this" is apparently very different than yours, in that doesn't involve "big tent historical analysis" where we must accept everyone's speculation as equal no matter its basis or reasonableness.   Nor does it involve posting phony quotes or misrepresenting the source material.  Nor does it involve implicitly accepting, condoning, and even encouraging such behavior,  or laughing it off, no matter how many times it happens.  

Surely Myopia is a great and important place, and it deserves better than fanciful theories based on a twisted and inaccurate understanding of the source material, and it certainly deserves better than the dishonest, agenda driven treatment it has received by its self appointed defender here.    As I said before, surely some at Myopia would like to know what really happened, and we won't figure that out by treating the Weeks narrative as Gospel, and pretending that there is more there than there really is.

__________________________

As I have already explained, I don't think modern standards for sodding are applicable to what happened at Myopia for a number of reasons, not the least of those is that, according to Bush, some of the members objected to playing on the course in the condition it was in.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Please don't bother to type out all that (again) on my account.  Believe me, I understand your point of view and agree with some of it.  Explaining it one more time won't change anyone's mind on this, and neither will me replying.

Its not a question of whether your analysis is better or worse, its a question of whether ANY analysis that dismisses club records known to exist, can be much good or even considered "serious research?"   I say no.

Myopia is a special place with its preserved its 1901 era course.  I know its frustrating for researchers to not have access, but part of the same culture that preserves the course also preserves privacy and access, even if "just" to see their records.  I think they view outside access about like Woody Hayes viewed the forward pass - three things can happen and two of them are bad! 

Do you expect the clubs you and TMac put in your gunsights to reserve the White Horse for you to ride in on when and if you ever actually go visit them?  These exhanges may further reduce the chances some really qualified historians from ever seeing their records and getting the story right while your preserve your "right" to be rude and condescending on the internet.  Merry Xmas.   

[Tom MacWood]

I got the dates on the Appleton Farm while in Massachussetts. It comes from chronicles of/and some letters and diaries including the Appletons and a few other families of some of their friends (a number of the same names from Myopia Hunt Club and other Boston clubs and summer communities). Those families had been into a number of sports including foxhunting, polo, tennis, golf, sailing, yachting etc for generations. It's remarkably to me how many of those families are still there in the same places and clubs. Boston and some of its surrounding summer communities such as the North Shore seems to be far more generationally enduring than the same basic societies around New York or Philadelphia from back in those days and before. I'm not sure why that is.  

TEP
I've been in contact with Appleton Farms and they have no idea when the golf course was built or what became of it. They said there are no signs of it on the ground nor is there any reference to it in their archives. The only reason they knew about it was because of someone in Philadelphia who told them about it. Evidently this person is doing research for a book on the first golf courses in America. He told them Appleton Farm and Myopia were the two oldest courses in America. I suspect this person actually told her they were among the first golf courses in America, but who knows.

Where did you see the information on Appleton Farms being built in 1892 or 1893? Why aren't you able to pinpoint the year?

[TEPaul]

Tom:

That's true, Appleton Farms today, as it is run now which is a trust or foundation does not seem to know anything about the private estate golf course that was there in the early 1890s or even where those six or so holes once were. Today the place operates as something of a research and conservation preserve of grasses and some crops and such. It is also of course open to the public to walk around and so forth. I believe the last of the Appleton family donated it to this effort in the last 12 to 15 or so years and to some degree funded it. The staff there is basically a few youngish people primarily interested in land conservation. I met them all a few years ago when I went there with my Myopia partner Dan Bacon. Ipswich is very close to South Hamilton and Myopia. A young man by the name of Wolcott (last name) which is one of those same generational families of that Boston world works there too and we primarily went to see him. When we got there he was mowing a field.

That is not where I confirmed the existence of the Appleton course of 1892 or 1893. I explained that to you some pages ago when you asked me the same question. Apparently you just don't bother to read what I write when I respond to you (not to even mention that both you and Moriarty have admitted on here several times you generally don't bother to read what I write) so this time as far as I'm concerned you can just look back on this thread or whichever Myopia thread it was on and find it for yourself.

And I have no idea who they were referring to from Philadelphia who was doing a book on early American courses. Maybe they got confused with the fact I asked them if they knew where the old six hole Appleton Farm course was when I went there 3-4 years ago. Or maybe someone from Philadelphia is writing a book about the oldest Boston or American courses. The old course at Appleton Farms is certainly no secret to most good golf and architecture historians, and it's certainly no secret to most of those old generational families of those clubs up there. By the way, my Myopia partner's great grandfather was Robert Bacon, one of the three TCC members who laid out the first holes of the TCC before Willie Campbell first arrived in America.

Good luck. You're the one who calls himself the "expert independent researcher" aren't you?    

[Mike Cirba]

Didn't TMac find an 1897 article that referred to the existence of the golf course at Appleton Farm?

I anyone is going to dig anything up here besides the club minutes, I would think locating a copy of the 1940s book would be the place to start.

[TEPaul]

"If anyone is going to dig anything up here besides the club minutes, I would think locating a copy of the 1940s book would be the place to start."


Mike:

I sure know where to find that one but I have a hunch that it may not be much help with what we're concentrating on. The reason I sense that is there are still a number of people at Myopia who knew and remember Ted Weeks well and it seems most of them feel that he began to get interested in his book off of the on-going research work of George Batchelder that began around the war. Batchelder was Weeks's partner with the book until he died in 1971. Apparently Batchelder began his research work on Myopia back then for the very reason that it seemed to him that the club had never really looked into the history of their golf course, and apparently that included Forbes's book that may've been done in the early 1940s. In my opinion, there is only one way that anything new or of interest from some new reanalysis perspective is going to come up now on Myopia's golf architecture history and that is for someone to just start in 1893 or 1894 and with Myopia's help and assistance and just go right on through everything in their archives, particularly on golf and architecture. And who from GOLFCLUBATLAS.com or from any interest in its perspective is going to do that?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I hope someone can do that as it is clearly the first excellent architecture in this country.

Know any volunteers?

[DMoriarty]

Jeff Brauer, so long as you keep making things up to I'll probably continue to set the record straight.  

Here again you foolishly claim that I have dismissed "club records known to exist."

First, I've dismissed no such thing.  If there are contemporaneous club records that address who laid out the original course, I'd be glad to consider them.  I have even accepted the Bush quote at face value, despite the fact that we don't know from what it was from.

Second, You DO NOT know whether or not club records addressing who created the initial course exist.  You guys pretend you do, but you don't.  You guys would like to believe that Weeks must have relied on them, but his own account suggests otherwise.  Weeks had whatever Bush wrote, but other than that, look at what he wrote:
- If Weeks had detailed Club records such as a minutes book from the meetings of the Executive Board, then wouldn't he have known the date of the 1894 meeting?  
- And if there were more records, actual contemporaneous records, then why didn't he rely on those instead of the after-the-fact account provided by Bush which does not even address who laid out the course.  
- Wouldn't he AT LEAST have known the correct identity of the Club Secretary at the time?
- If such records existed and addressed the creation of the course, wouldn't Weeks have been able to give us a date certain for when this occurred, because it seems like he is speculating about when he thinks this might have occurred.  They started "after the snow melted?"   You think the minutes referred to them starting "when the snow melted?"   What sort of administrative records identify events by references to natural events?  Did the records also say they laid sod when the first salmon ran upstream?
- Can you even imagine an administrative record stating that AM&G "probably" pegged out the greens?  I cannot.
- Wouldn't Weeks have known about Campbell's involvement?  
- Wouldn't he have known that it took a lot less than three months, at least according to multiple reports?
- Wouldn't he have known precisely when the course melted.

Even TEPaul must have sensed that Weeks and Bush, didn't have all the facts, otherwise he would not have had to post the phony quote to try and trick us into believing there was more detail than there really was.  

As for your attempted swipes about "serious research" and "qualified historians" they are worth nothing but a chuckle when one considers the source.  But how you can you continue to try and cut me down to size, while in the same posts you scold me for supposedly doing the same the same thing.  I understand why your feelings are hurt. No one likes to be told they have gotten it wrong again and again, if when they have gotten it wrong again and again. But are your insults any less offensive just because they almost always miss the mark?  

_______________________________

In my opinion, there is only one way that anything new or of interest from some new reanalysis perspective is going to come up now on Myopia's golf architecture history and that is for someone to just start in 1893 or 1894 and with Myopia's help and assistance and just go right on through everything in their archives, particularly on golf and architecture. And who from GOLFCLUBATLAS.com or from any interest in its perspective is going to do that?

Well, according to you, you already have reviewed these records.  You have been making various claims about these records for years now!  So why would anyone have to do it again?

Regardless, As I said before, if anyone accesses and reviews their records then I hope that person is more honest and trustworthy that the person who falsely claimed to have already done so.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Whenever I feel badly about missing the mark, I just remind myself that TMac dismissed club records and speculated his opinion based on train schedules that HH Barker designed Merion, and as far as I know, believes that to this day.  And yet, he claims the moral authority to lecture me on speculating!

For that matter, your repeated detailed analysis of Merion didn't really work out all that well, albeit you were a lot closer than TMac was.

For that matter, part two, I recall Mr. Mac telling us that when he presented a theory, he didn't need facts to back it up, since it was a theory.  For those reasons, I can't understand why you two continually bash others for the same thing.  Why is it okay for TMac to make things up, but not me?

[DMoriarty]

Jeffrey Brauer,

I don't understand where posts like the above post come from.   They are not only motivated by mean-spiritedness, they are also far removed from the topic at hand.

[Mike Cirba]

I think at this point the audacity, arrogance, and continued insults being spewed here should be cause for shutting down this thread.

Talk of ex-wives and drinking have no place here and this is a goddamn shame, yet again.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
I hope someone can do that as it is clearly the first excellent architecture in this country."



Michael:

I am delighted to hear you say that. As you may or may not know, I have always had the utmost respect for your basic opinions and sensibilities on golf course architecture as well as your ability to express your opinions about that very honestly.

When I heard some time last fall that you would be seeing and perhaps playing Myopia for your first time it delighted me because I felt fairly confident that you both could and would see and realize what I find so special about it and that is despite its age and somewhat "old fashionedness" and occasional quirkiness that it very, very likely  IS the FIRST really good golf course architecture in America!

[Tom MacWood]

Jeff
You are obviously having trouble getting your mind around this whole idea of basing ones theory on some facts. With some fear this will throw this thread completely off the track (something I'm sure you and TEP would love to see) let me give you the Barker example of how one uses facts to form a theory. Here are the facts:

1. Barker was engaged by the people at Merion to go over the property and give his opinion
2. Barker's plan for the course is the only known plan
3. On November 24 in the Phila Press it was reported Barker had been secured by Merion to design the course
4. On December 1 it was reported Barker was off on a 3 week road trip where several new courses would be staked out
5. On December 8-10 Barker is in Atlanta
6. In November 1914 Verdant Greene claimed Barker laid out or redesigned at least 3 courses around Philadelphia

Those are six different reports from six different sources. What facts are you basing your Myopia theory upon? Can you present similar point by point using known facts from contemporaneous sources?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom:

That's true, Appleton Farms today, as it is run now which is a trust or foundation does not seem to know anything about the private estate golf course that was there in the early 1890s or even where those six or so holes once were. Today the place operates as something of a research and conservation preserve of grasses and some crops and such. It is also of course open to the public to walk around and so forth. I believe the last of the Appleton family donated it to this effort in the last 12 to 15 or so years and to some degree funded it. The staff there is basically a few youngish people primarily interested in land conservation. I met them all a few years ago when I went there with my Myopia partner Dan Bacon. Ipswich is very close to South Hamilton and Myopia. A young man by the name of Wolcott (last name) which is one of those same generational families of that Boston world works there too and we primarily went to see him. When we got there he was mowing a field.

That is not where I confirmed the existence of the Appleton course of 1892 or 1893. I explained that to you some pages ago when you asked me the same question. Apparently you just don't bother to read what I write when I respond to you (not to even mention that both you and Moriarty have admitted on here several times you generally don't bother to read what I write) so this time as far as I'm concerned you can just look back on this thread or whichever Myopia thread it was on and find it for yourself.

And I have no idea who they were referring to from Philadelphia who was doing a book on early American courses. Maybe they got confused with the fact I asked them if they knew where the old six hole Appleton Farm course was when I went there 3-4 years ago. Or maybe someone from Philadelphia is writing a book about the oldest Boston or American courses. The old course at Appleton Farms is certainly no secret to most good golf and architecture historians, and it's certainly no secret to most of those old generational families of those clubs up there. By the way, my Myopia partner's great grandfather was Robert Bacon, one of the three TCC members who laid out the first holes of the TCC before Willie Campbell first arrived in America.

Good luck. You're the one who calls himself the "expert independent researcher" aren't you?    

TEP
You said you got the information from chronicles of/and some letters and diaries including the Appletons and a few other families of some of their friends. Where did you find those chronicles, letters and diaries, and why aren't you able to pinpoint the date?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I had intended to start a thread taling about the actual architecture of the course, and why I thought it was so special, but figured it would devolve into another waste of typing as too many of these historical threads tend to do.

Perhaps a thread comparing what we know of the original course versus the "Long Nine" versus the 18 hole course might be worthwhile to explore but even there I sense people who have never been there would try to offer authoritative opinions, which might be funny if it wasn't so non-productive.