Willie Campbell & Myopia

[TEPaul]

"TEP
You're right."

Tom:

I suppose that shocks you, huh, Tom?  


David Moriarty:

Why in the world are you trying to rant on like that last post about Myopia? You don't know one damn thing about Myopia; I'm sure you've never been there, I bet you've never even seen Weeks's book about it, much less read it and I'm positive you know zero about Myopia's executive committee records and what they say. You've never seen them but I have and yet you're trying to tell people on here how they should be interpreted?

No matter how many preposterous things you say on here or how often you say them, you, like anyone else needs to have a working relationship with any club to do a credible job of trying to write about their history. Don't take the advice from me if you don't want to but try to take it from others who have done it before you like Young, Quirin, Labbance, Shackelford, Silverman et al.

Do you actually believe anyone thinks some egotistical, highly argumentative smuck like you has figured out a better way to go about it than any of them?

But just keep ranting on as you have and after a while I doubt there will be a reputable or signifcant golf club in America even willing to show you the inside of their door. But why should that concern someone with your outlook and attitude since you don't even appear to be interested in finding any important club's door?


"He is demanding that we take his word for the ultimate question at issue!"


I'm not DEMANDING a damn thing. All I'm doing is expressing my opinion on what I actually know and what I've actually seen. I'm not guessing and speculating about things I don't know and have never seen as you've been doing on here with Merion and Myopia.

So what else are you doing other than constantly trashing the opinions of others who know a lot more about these subjects than you ever have or probably ever will?!?

If you don't like my opinion or Wayne's opinion on what we know and have seen then go to some of these clubs yourself. Don't depend on me or Wayne Morrison or anyone else to do any legwork for you because I will guarantee you with the way you've been and the way you are on this website that is not going to happen. Not ever.

I would work with Tom MacWood in the future if he would somehow learn how to analyze these things logically and get over this fixation he has about these types like Wilson and Crump being idolized by their clubs and friends and some of these early journeymen being dissed as a consequence, but I would never have a thing to do with you in the future on anything. In my opinion you are a total waste-of-time washout on here. Your opinions and posts are a constant stream of some combination of arrogance, total lack of logic and really bad comedy and that's a very poor combination in this particular area of research and analysis.

[DMoriarty]

Setting aside TEPaul's rudeness and obnoxiousness, this seems pretty linear to me.

- At Myopia's March 1894 Executive Committee Meeting it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.
- Shortly thereafter, the famous professional, Willie Campbell, arrived in Boston.
- Sometime before June 1894, Campbell reportedly laid out the golf links at Myopia.
- In June 1894 the course was ready for play, and the course hosted their first tournament.

I am unaware of any source material that contradicts this.  Certainly none has been presented here.   Is anyone aware of any verifiable source material that contradicts this?

[TEPaul]

"I am unaware of any source material that contradicts this.  Certainly none has been presented here.   Is anyone aware of any verifiable source material that contradicts this?"


Of course you are; why wouldn't you be unaware of any source material that contradicts that "linear list"   of yours?

Is anyone on here aware of any verifiable source material that contradicts this?

I doubt it. Who on this thread other than me has ever even been to Myopia and tried to actually work with them about their history and what their club source material says about it?

I don't see that question of mine is in any way rude or obnoxious. The answer to it is pretty much just a statement of fact, don't you think? Aren't you the one who says on here every day you just want facts?

You're the same guy who asked on here how you could ignore something if you've never seen it in the first place, right? Well, that's an interesting way to put it but you can't deny you still haven't seen it right? If so why try to comment on what it says or doesn't say if you've never seen it? I've seen it and that's why I commented on it.  

[Phil_the_Author]

David and Tom,

Bottom line... show me what is FIRST-HAND evidence in any of those articles. There is none. Everything is a report of second-hand information. I ALSO stated that what Weeks wrote was not first-hand either. In other words, their veracity should be judged EQUALLY. 

By the way, the source material for EVERYTHING in my Tilly bio is available to anyone who wants to see it. I simply am under an ethical constraint to show others the copy of the medical records. If that means that another historian or scholar decides not to accept what I wrote I'm fine with that; its their loss. If they are too lazy to go to the source and see it for themselves yet criticize my adherance to principle than shame on them.

But of course, that is just my opinion... 

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

You stated in a quite "linear" fashion that:

- At Myopia's March 1894 Executive Committee Meeting it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.
- Shortly thereafter, the famous professional, Willie Campbell, arrived in Boston.
- Sometime before June 1894, Campbell reportedly laid out the golf links at Myopia.
- In June 1894 the course was ready for play, and the course hosted their first tournament.

You then followed with, "I am unaware of any source material that contradicts this.  Certainly none has been presented here.   Is anyone aware of any verifiable source material that contradicts this?"

Can YOU provide VERIFIABLE SOURCE MATERIAL that Campbell was hired by Myopia to design and/or lay-out the new golf course?

[TEPaul]

Philip:

I'm not too sure why you are even trying to discuss that kind of thing with the two people you addressed that last post to. This idea on here that none of us can or should discuss something or offer our opinions on something we both know and have seen without showing it to someone on here is about the dumbest and most arrogant suggestion I've ever heard. This is an opinion website and not some damn court of law with its encumbant "discovery" requirement.

I think the only possible reason those two guys try to make it look like we owe them a copy of everything we express our opinion on around here is because both of them realize that is about the only conceivable way either of them would ever be able to get it.

I have no sympathy for people like that. I just think it proves they are either lazy or they just lack initiative and an appreciation of what personal responsibility in this particular context means.

[Tom MacWood]

David and Tom,

Bottom line... show me what is FIRST-HAND evidence in any of those articles. There is none. Everything is a report of second-hand information. I ALSO stated that what Weeks wrote was not first-hand either. In other words, their veracity should be judged EQUALLY. 

By the way, the source material for EVERYTHING in my Tilly bio is available to anyone who wants to see it. I simply am under an ethical constraint to show others the copy of the medical records. If that means that another historian or scholar decides not to accept what I wrote I'm fine with that; its their loss. If they are too lazy to go to the source and see it for themselves yet criticize my adherance to principle than shame on them.

But of course, that is just my opinion... 

What Tilly bio?

[DMoriarty]

Is TEPaul's only point here to tell us repeatedly that he is welcome at Myopia and we are not?  I think we all knew that already.  He certainly seems disinterested in advancing the conversation, or even engaging in one.  

Setting aside TEPaul's rudeness and obnoxiousness, this seems pretty linear to me.

- At Myopia's March 1894 Executive Committee Meeting it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.
- Shortly thereafter, the famous professional, Willie Campbell, arrived in Boston.
- Sometime before June 1894, Campbell reportedly laid out the golf links at Myopia.
- In June 1894 the course was ready for play, and the course hosted their first tournament.

I am unaware of any source material that contradicts this.  Certainly none has been presented here.   Is anyone aware of any VERIFIABLE source material that contradicts this?

________________________________

Phillip,  

By "verifiable" in this context I mean only that the source material is what the presenter claims it to be.  For example, I have presented a Boston Journal article that says Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia.    You can look at it and see that I have presented this truthfully and accurately.  You can decide for yourself what weight to give it.   Contrast this with TEPaul's approach, where he claims that the "administrative records" establish that someone other than Campbell laid out the first nine.   He has not offered any source material or even told us what the source material actually says, so we have know way of knowing even whether he has presented it accurately.  

There are multiple reports that Willie Campbell laid out Myopia's original nine holes.   You can verify the existence of those reports and decide for yourself what they mean.

And Phillip, whether those reports are first hand, second hand, or pure fiction, they are the only information from that time frame about who laid out the course.

[TEPaul]

"I didn't ask you how long it took to build Myopia, I asked how long it took to build a typical course in 1894."


Tom:

OK. It's a guess on my part but I would say it took about as long to build the typical golf course in 1894 as it took to built that original nine hole course of Myopia Hunt Club in 1894.

Does that answer work for you or does it make no sense at all to you like most of the rest of what I say?

But I don't know. What do you suppose "typical" means? Should we parse the meaning of that word for about ten pages? Maybe we could just ask Moriarty what he is probably certain it means and if anyone tells him differently he will say that their opinion is preposterous, distorted, doctored or some such.

Tom, honestly, why in the hell do you ask me a question like that? I mean, really, what's the point?

And why the hell don't you try to answer the really important question asked on here about how different is that original nine from Leed's "Long Nine." You just avoid and dismiss that question every time it's asked of you and the reason why you do has just gotten so fucking obvious at this point. Is it really so hard for a total research snob like you to just admit when he's wrong or just doesn't know something?

Matter of fact why in the hell are you even discussing a golf course you know so little about?  Why is Moriarty who knows even less about it than you do?

[DMoriarty]

And Phillip, what's your point?

What evidence is there that someone other than Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia?      

I'd appreciate it if you listed it out, because I am unaware of any, verifiable or not.  

[TEPaul]

"Is TEPaul's only point here to tell us repeatedly that he is welcome at Myopia and we are not?  I think we all knew that already.  He certainly seems disinterested in advancing the conversation, or even engaging in one."


No, I'm just trying to tell you that Myopia's executive committee records say that Appleton, Gardner and Merrill staked out the routing of Myopia's original nine hole course. I think that is maximally advancing the conversation! Is that verifiable? Yes it is; I verified it and if you don't want to take my word for it and you'd prefer to personally verify it yourself then you are pretty much going to have to go to South Hamilton, Massachusetts and Myopia Hunt Club and verify it for yourself as I have done for the last couple of years. I guess you don't like to travel, huh, or you're too damn lazy to. Well, I don't either really but I do it anyway if I'm as interested in something as I am in Myopia and its history. And one thing you sure do avoid is admitting that it is definitely YOUR responsibility to verify something for yourself and not my responsibility to do that for you. You just keep avoid (sic) avoiding that, you always have and you probably always will.

Again, at this point some of us on here are no longer willing to do any of your research legwork for you because of your attitude on this website.  

[DMoriarty]

Yes, the reason I don't have access at Merion and Myopia is because I am lazy.  It is the free market at work and I don't deserve access because I haven't earned it.  And conversely, the reason TEPaul has access to these clubs is that he is a real go-getter!  He's pulled himself up by his bootstraps and earned everything he has, including red carpet treatment at all these clubs!

TEPaul,

Perhaps it is a confusing concept for you, but you telling us your conclusions about Myopia's history is not advancing the conversation.   In a conversation there would be a "because . . . " and some explanation and presentation of the information you were relying on.  Then we might ask for clarification or context.   But as it is, you have given us a take it or leave it proposition.  There is nothing to talk about.

So now we know your opinion, for what it is worth.   But it is worth very little unless it has some basis in fact.  

[TEPaul]

"What evidence is there that someone other than Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia?"


WHAT evidence? I keep telling you Myopia Hunt Club's on executive committe evidence that says Appleton, Gardner and Merrill routed the original nine hole course.

Oh, I get it; you're the same as Tom MacWood has always been in that if he hasn't actually seen something he contends that it just doesn't exist.

Does anyone really want to try to have a discussion with someone who actually thinks like that?    

[Tom MacWood]

"Is TEPaul's only point here to tell us repeatedly that he is welcome at Myopia and we are not?  I think we all knew that already.  He certainly seems disinterested in advancing the conversation, or even engaging in one."


No, I'm just trying to tell you that Myopia's executive committee records say that Appleton, Gardner and Merrill staked out the routing of Myopia's original nine hole course. I think that is maximally advancing the conversation! Is that verifiable? Yes it is; I verified it and if you don't want to take my word for it and you'd prefer to personally verify it yourself then you are pretty much going to have to go to South Hamilton, Massachusetts and Myopia Hunt Club and verify it for yourself as I have done for the last couple of years. I guess you don't like to travel, huh, or you're too damn lazy to. Well, I don't either really but I do it anyway if I'm as interested in something as I am in Myopia and its history. And one thing you sure do avoid is admitting that it is definitely YOUR responsibility to verify something for yourself and not my responsibility to do that for you. You just keep avoid that, you always have and you probably always will.

Again, at this point some of us on here are no longer willing to do any of your research legwork for you because of your attitude on this website.  

TEP
I think you meant to say Myopia's colorful club history says Appleton, Gardner and Merrill laid out Myopia's original nine. The executive committee recorded the following:

'At a meeting of the Executive Committee March 1894 it was decided to build a golflinks on the Myopia grounds.'

No mention of Appleton, Gardner and Merrill. No mention of when the work began. And no mention of when the work was completed or by whom. As usual you are long on opinion and short on facts, but you do have a very vivd imagination.

[DMoriarty]

"What evidence is there that someone other than Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia?"


WHAT evidence? I keep telling you Myopia Hunt Club's on executive committe evidence that says Appleton, Gardner and Merrill routed the original nine hole course.

That isn't evidence.  It is your conclusion.  I see no basis for that conclusion in what has been presented on this website, verified or not.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You asked, "What Tilly bio?"

Tillinghast: Creator of Golf Courses. Published by Classics of Golf released November 2006.

[Phil_the_Author]

David, you stated that, “By "verifiable" in this context I mean only that the source material is what the presenter claims it to be.  For example, I have presented a Boston Journal article that says Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia.    You can look at it and see that I have presented this truthfully and accurately.  You can decide for yourself what weight to give it.   Contrast this with TEPaul's approach, where he claims that the "administrative records" establish that someone other than Campbell laid out the first nine.   He has not offered any source material or even told us what the source material actually says, so we have know way of knowing even whether he has presented it accurately.”

That is not correct. Go back one page on this thread and look up post #138 authored by Tom Macwood. He directly QUOTES Tom Paul’s own offering of source material. That Tom Macwood believes that it was correctly transcribed can be shown by HIS OWN use of this quoted information in his reply #143 where he states:

“You can accept Mr. Weeks' account, but I'm certainly not. He told us what the official record said: 'At a meeting of the Executive Committee March 1894 it was decided to build a golflinks on the Myopia grounds.' I assume the quote is accurate…”

You stated also, “There are multiple reports that Willie Campbell laid out Myopia's original nine holes.   You can verify the existence of those reports and decide for yourself what they mean.”

That is true and I have decided a POTENTIAL understanding for what they might mean. That can be found in my response #135.

You finished by stating, “And Phillip, whether those reports are first hand, second hand, or pure fiction, they are the only information from that time frame about who laid out the course.” I must disagree with you here. Again, refer back to Tom Macwood’s post #135 where he accepts Tom Paul’s transcribing of Week’s writing in which he speaks to a creation of the course in which Campbell’s name isn’t mentioned while the other three members that Tom refers to are…

[TEPaul]

"So now we know your opinion, for what it is worth.   But it is worth very little unless it has some basis in fact."


Well, then, I guess all I can say is I'm pretty sure my opinion of what Merion's and Myopia's records mean regarding their history is worth a bit more to them than your opinion is. And in their opinions there are a number of pretty good reasons why that's the case.

Maybe you think this website's DG is the real world where the histories of these club's should be recorded. I really don't. I think those clubs are the real world and I take comfort in the fact that they put more worth in my opinion than they do in yours.

I don't see that changing but you should just ask them about that at any particular point in time.

Let's just leave it at that, shall we?  

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

You asked me what was MY POINT... It is a simple one. Some, including yourself, keep insisting that verifiable first-hand evidence be provided by any and all claiming that someone other than Campbell designed the original nine at Myopia before it can be accepted, yet you refuse to both provide the same for your contention that Campbell did it and even acknowledge that what you have presented is NOT first-hand evidence and therefor is of no greater value than what has been presented by others.

So my point is a simple one... You can't have it both ways!

The "evidence" that has declared that three Myopia members designed the original nine holes is second-hand at best. So is the evidence found in those three newspaper reports.

So now I must ask you, what's your point? What VERIFIABLE FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE is there that Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia?      

I'd appreciate it if you listed it out, because I am unaware of any...

I would also like to see what you think of my theory that ties all of these different reports into a single and reasonable version of what might have happened...

[TEPaul]

"The executive committee recorded the following:"


Tom:

Is that right? Is that all the executive committee said? I thought you've never been to Myopia so how could you know that's all "The Run Book" says on the subject? You almost fooled me; I thought I read in The Run Book that Appleton, Gardner and Merrill staked out tees and greens when the snow melted in early 1894. Do you think Weeks just poetically dreamed all that up? Don't answer that; I'm sure you do.  

Tom, I really don't think there is any reason to continue this as I just don't see it going anywhere at all. I don't really care what the hell you think Myopia's architectural history is or what you think Campbell did there. I only care about what Myopia has and knows about that. If their records didn't really mention Campbell there is probably a pretty good reason for it such as they just never thought back then he was anything like you claim he is.

Live with it Pal, if you call yourself an historian.    

[DMoriarty]

Phillip,  The passages on page 138 are from Weeks' book, which was written in 1975, 81 years after the fact.   You don't seriously consider that source material do you?     The only thing remotely related to source material in the quote was the reference to the executive committee meeting where it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.  That says nothing of the three, and nothing about how the course was laid out!

It is a joke for you to compare three accounts written at the time with a club history written 100 years later.   

David,

You asked me what was MY POINT... It is a simple one. Some, including yourself, keep insisting that verifiable first-hand evidence be provided by any and all claiming that someone other than Campbell designed the original nine at Myopia before it can be accepted, yet you refuse to both provide the same for your contention that Campbell did it and even acknowledge that what you have presented is NOT first-hand evidence and therefor is of no greater value than what has been presented by others.

I haven't demanded first-hand evidence.  I have demanded evidence.   TEPaul's conclusions are not evidence but that is all we have.   That you would even suggest that Weeks 1975 history is evidence is preposterous. 

Other than references to Weeks' 1975 book you have pointed to absolutely NO EVIDENCE that the three had anything to do with laying out the course.

So my point is a simple one... You can't have it both ways!

The "evidence" that has declared that three Myopia members designed the original nine holes is second-hand at best. So is the evidence found in those three newspaper reports.

So now I must ask you, what's your point? What VERIFIABLE FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE is there that Willie Campbell laid out nine holes at Myopia?     

I am not trying to have it both ways.  On the one hand we have evidence, on the other we have none.   You are the one who injected first-hand into this, apparently because of a lack of understanding of what was hearsay and what is not.   

I would also like to see what you think of my theory that ties all of these different reports into a single and reasonable version of what might have happened..

As for your theory, I've seen no facts that support it whatsoever.   Have you?

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

You stated, “The passages on page 138 are from Weeks' book, which was written in 1975, 81 years after the fact.   You don't seriously consider that source material do you?”

No, I do not. I do maintain that WEEKS considered that what he was both quoting from and referencing to be FIRST-HAND source material and that there is nothing in any of the three newspaper accounts which can qualify as such.

“The only thing remotely related to source material in the quote was the reference to the executive committee meeting where it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.  That says nothing of the three, and nothing about how the course was laid out!” Again, go back to the quoted portion in Tom Macwood’s post and you will see that all three are named before and after his quoting the administrative records. Willie Campbell is the name that is NOT MENTIONED.

“It is a joke for you to compare three accounts written at the time with a club history written 100 years later.” This is insulting and uncalled for. Disagree with my comparison, but a JOKE it is not!   

“I haven't demanded first-hand evidence.  I have demanded evidence.   TEPaul's conclusions are not evidence but that is all we have…” I have never, not one single time in this discussion stated or even suggested that Tom Paul’s conclusions are EVIDENCE. In fact, I haven’t referred to his conclusions at all.

“That you would even suggest that Weeks 1975 history is evidence is preposterous.” Sorry, but it is. In fact your next statement shows it for if it weren’t then what YOU say can have no validity on its face. “Other than references to Weeks' 1975 book you have pointed to absolutely NO EVIDENCE that the three had anything to do with laying out the course.” Once again, it is the only thing written that claims to directly quote from SOURCE MATERIAL.

“Phillip,  The passages on page 138 are from Weeks' book, which was written in 1975, 81 years after the fact.   You don't seriously consider that source material do you?” NO, I DO NOT! But I maintain that WEEKS DID, for he directly quoted from club “administrative records” recorded at the time it was created. NO ONE ELSE HAS DONE SO.

“The only thing remotely related to source material in the quote was the reference to the executive committee meeting where it was decided to to build a golf links on Myopia's grounds.  That says nothing of the three, and nothing about how the course was laid out!” Once again, please refer back to Tom Macwood’s post where this is contained and which he stated later that he believed that Tom Paul had transcribed it correctly, and you will see that all three members are named before and after the quote from the “administrative records” that even you “remotely” recognize as “source material.” The only name that is glaringly OMMITTED is CAMPBELL’S.

“It is a joke for you to compare three accounts written at the time with a club history written 100 years later.” Once again you choose to insult rather than to simply disagree.

I again ask that you look at my hypothesis that ties all the accounts together and explain how it is unreasonable as a possibility… 

[Tom MacWood]

It seems the original holes of Myopia Hunt Club were not laid out by Willie Campbell, as has been suggested. thread.

It seems the original holes were laid out beginning in March 1894 ('when the winter snow melted') by three Myopia Hunt Club members, R.M. Appleton, "Squire" Merrill and A.P. Gardner. The club records even describes most of these first nine holes. The club record also describes these three "partners" footing it over the terrain staking out tee and green sites. The recording of the club Secretary at that time, S. Dacre Bush, describes the proceedings of the club that led to the laying out of the nine hole course.

The holes were in play within three months and by the beginning of July, 1894 two tournaments had been held on them. TCC's scratch golfer, Herbert Leeds won both of them. In 1896 Leeds would join Myopia as well.

TEP
Run book? The quote above is the sort of stuff you regularly spew on this site to give the impression you have some special historical access. The actual translation 'club record' = the history book. The official club record from the executive committee is a terse statement (in the words of Weeks) found in the club record....errr, history book:

'At a meeting of the Executive Committee March 1894 it was decided to build a golflinks on the Myopia grounds.'

The rest of Weeks story reads like fantasy land, which is probably why you like it. Not unlike your fictional take on Flynn's early history, a kid from the other side of the track marries a member of an august Boston family, they move to Vermont and he designs his first course at the age of 19. And not unlike your favorite history book written by Desmond Tolhurst (maybe second favorite now to Weeks book) in which half the facts he gives are in error. I have to give you credit, there was a time not too long ago when you relied exclusively on Cornish & Whitten, at least you have graduated to club histories. You are making progress.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
This is the only quote from the executive committee about the original nine hole course, and that quote is what I said I assumed was transcribed accurately:

'At a meeting of the Executive Committee March 1894 it was decided to build a golflinks on the Myopia grounds.'

Based on the evidence presented so far who do you believe laid out the first nine at Myopia?

[Tom MacWood]

TEP and/or Phil

How long did it typically take to build a nine-hole golf course in 1894?

For whatever reason you boys have avoided answering this question.