Seminole Golf Club - The Other Architect

[Jim_Coleman]

    Pete told me a few years ago (while having a drink at La Romana Country Club) that he donated a portrait of "Amos Jones" to Seminole to be hung next to Ross'.  Apparently they they declined the opportunity.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

I see that a couple of years ago you put a comprehensive timeline on this thread apparently to explain why early on Pete Dye could not really have had any knowledge of Seminole on the subject of the greens being significantly changed.

I had a long conversation with Pete Dye the other evening but unfortunately I did not ask him when he recalls those greens were changed. It did not sound to me like he was talking about before or just after WW2. It sounded like he was talking about the 1960s, 1970s or even later.
That would make sense.

He went into a long explanation about the contractors who were a big well known company out of Tifton, Georgia. He even gave me a long and detailed explanation about their topdressing methods (and he said he is mailing me some material on that), the piece of machinery they used (a Cushman) and how and why the brushes that were dragged behind the Cushman did not distribute the topdressing evenly over the green contours.
Tifton, GA was the epicenter of certified grasses for a while.
I'm not sure about the contractors, although it would seem logical that some would be from that area.

Perhaps the architectural trail lies within the chronology of the names of the Presidents and Green Chairs once Dunphy was no longer at the helm

Mark indicates that the 18th was transitioned East between 1958 and 1964.
I first played there between 1960 and 1964 and can't remember # 18.
I remember meeting Chris Dunphy who was our host.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Concerning your #104, at this point I really don't know when the 18th green was moved; I only mentioned when the history book said it was moved.

Mark Bourgeois has done some excellent research work with these aerials. I only wish I could figure out how to use them better.

However, before putting all my faith in what those aerials seem to indicate I would suggest checking to make sure all those aerials are dated correctly.

Seminole already made one mistake with bunker attribution by misdating a photograph.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TE,

I had always associated the moving of # 18 green to circa 1948.

Earlier, I had also questioned the accuracy of the dating of the aerial photos.

However, it seems unlikely that Wilson made the change in 1948.

It makes more sense, politically and otherwise that he made the change in 1963 when his individual popularity, architecturally was near it's high water mark.

In addition, Wilson was the greenskeeper at Delray Beach CC until WWII.
During WWII he was employed camouflaging airfields.
After WWII he partnered with Troup Brothers, an earthmoving firm.

He didn't begin solo design projects until 1947 when he designed Kinderton in Virginia, then Westmoreland in 1948.

Strangely enough, his redesign work at other courses didn't begin until 1955, with the sole exception listed by C&W of Seminole in 1947.

But, if aerials of Seminole circa 1948 show the old green intact, then C&W are in error on the date.

It seems to me that Dick Wilson, whose work I really like, wasn't enough of a force in 1947, to revise Seminole, in any capacity

[Mark Bourgeois]

However, before putting all my faith in what those aerials seem to indicate I would suggest checking to make sure all those aerials are dated correctly.

Seminole already made one mistake with bunker attribution by misdating a photograph.

Tom, a valid concern as shown by the conflicting dates between the differences in the 1958 photo between the way the photo was tagged by archivists vs the *apparent* date on the actual slide.

I'll post more over on the photo thread to keep everything in one place.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Mark Bourgeois has done some excellent research work with these aerials. I only wish I could figure out how to use them better.

Your second sentence tells me the technology somehow may not be doing its job. The whole idea is to put these tools in the hands of people who actually know the courses and who can unlock the story the photos are telling us.

If it indeed is a technical issue, then please share ideally what you'd like to be able to do. Maybe the technology already is out there; in fact, it probably is.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark,

Your 1953 aerial seems to indicate that the 18th green has already been moved to its current location.

TE, what do you think ?

[TEPaul]

Mark:

You must understand I am a total antideluvian with computer and Internet technology so I may not be representative.


Pat:

I think you and I have a very different way of approaching club and course history or frankly any history. From knowing you and reading you on here as long as I have, I feel you are one of those people who just believes people make mistakes all the time and commonly.

When it comes to recording contemporaneous history (if it is done and comprehensively) I don't believe I agree with you.

For instance, the recent Seminole history book goes into a certain amount of detail about the people and opinions and the particulars of the movement of the 18th green in 1948.

I know a lot of golf history book writers but I don't know James Dodson who wrote Seminoles fairly recently. Somehow the quotations he uses and the colloquialisms of some his comments lead me to believe his stuff cannot be just made up out of the blue.

I believe in Mark B's aerials but first and foremost I would like to see the archival material Dodson was using to write that recent Seminole history book.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think you and I have a very different way of approaching club and course history or frankly any history. From knowing you and reading you on here as long as I have, I feel you are one of those people who just believes people make mistakes all the time and commonly.

They do.
Don't you read the newspapers ?
That's all the newspapers report....... people's mistakes.
We all make them.

When it comes to recording contemporaneous history (if it is done and comprehensively) I don't believe I agree with you.
That's a BIG "IF".  An "IF" that's at the heart of the issue.
The fact is, and you know it, that most of the club histories are NOT done comprehensively.
You know that from first hand experience at Merion and Pine Valley.

So, the caveat you added, "if it is done and comprehensively" is a huge cop-out, a qualifier that precludes admitting error.
For if there's an error, it must not have been done "comprehensively"
Rather than deal in hypotheticals, let's deal in realities and the realities are that many, if not most club histories were done by well intended members trying to assemble history for a favorable presentation.  Members who were successfully engaged in other professions, but rank amateurs at research and data gathering.  They did their best, but their best often wasn't properly detailed or accurate.

For instance, the recent Seminole history book goes into a certain amount of detail about the people and opinions and the particulars of the movement of the 18th green in 1948.

I know a lot of golf history book writers but I don't know James Dodson who wrote Seminoles fairly recently. Somehow the quotations he uses and the colloquialisms of some his comments lead me to believe his stuff cannot be just made up out of the blue.

No one said it was.
Why would you introduce a non-sequitur of that nature ?

I believe in Mark B's aerials but first and foremost I would like to see the archival material Dodson was using to write that recent Seminole history book.

Are you stating that the aerials presented by Mark are a deliberate misrepresentation ?
Or possibly the product of people making mistakes and misdating the aerial photos ?

Did you bother to look at the 1953 photo and answer the question I posed ?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Thanks for your last post; I think it says just about all I need to know.

You may be many things to some people or many things in your own mind but one thing you assuredly are not is a competent history analyst and/or historian!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

Thanks for your last post; I think it says just about all I need to know.

You may be many things to some people or many things in your own mind but one thing you assuredly are not is a competent history analyst and/or historian!

You're not qualified to make that assessment.

Stop avoiding answering the question about the 1953 aerial photo Mark posted

[TEPaul]

"Are you stating that the aerials presented by Mark are a deliberate misrepresentation ?"


No, not at all.




"Or possibly the product of people making mistakes and misdating the aerial photos ?"

No.



"Did you bother to look at the 1953 photo and answer the question I posed ?"


Yes, but I'm having trouble understanding some of the aerials. I called Mark about it. I just got in here and I have a message from him so I'm about to call him and discuss it.

On your question on the 1953 aerial see my post of this morning on the other Seminole thread. I think the green in the 1953 aerial is the old or original Ross green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Are you stating that the aerials presented by Mark are a deliberate misrepresentation ?"

No, not at all.

"Or possibly the product of people making mistakes and misdating the aerial photos ?"

No.

"Did you bother to look at the 1953 photo and answer the question I posed ?"

Yes, but I'm having trouble understanding some of the aerials. I called Mark about it. I just got in here and I have a message from him so I'm about to call him and discuss it.



On your question on the 1953 aerial see my post of this morning on the other Seminole thread. I think the green in the 1953 aerial is the old or original Ross green.

If that's what you think, and you're correct, that means that the history of Seminole is flawed, that they made a mistake regarding the timing of Wilson's work.   

I know you told me that these people DON'T make mistakes, yet here you are, claiming they did.

Would you please make up your mind.
Which is it ?  Do "these" people make mistakes ?  Or are they perfect ?

To me, with my poor eyesight, it looks like the green has already been moved to it's current site.
The aerial photo of Claude Harmon's 03-12-47 round may help with the photo analysis of the 1953 aerial

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Please get some kind of grip on yourself and stop just putting words in other peoples' mouths. I absolutely NEVER said 'these people never make mistakes.' I have found more mistakes in history books  of more golf clubs than you, MacWood and Moriarty combined have ever dreamed of doing. The most significant, in my opinion, was Pine Valley!!!

Yes, I guess your eye sight is bad because to me there is no question that 1953 aerial shows only the old green.

And yes, the Seminole history book says Wilson moved the 18th in 1948, I believe they are wrong about that due to the evidence in that 1953 aerial. What I would like to see is the documentary material in the club's archives that suggests that green was moved in 1948.

[JC Jones]

Pat:

Please get some kind of grip on yourself and stop just putting words in other peoples' mouths. I absolutely NEVER said 'these people never make mistakes.' I have found more mistakes in history books  of more golf clubs than you, MacWood and Moriarty combined have ever dreamed of doing. The most significant, in my opinion, was Pine Valley!!!

Yes, I guess your eye sight is bad because to me there is no question that 1953 aerial shows only the old green.

And yes, the Seminole history book says Wilson moved the 18th in 1948, I believe they are wrong about that due to the evidence in that 1953 aerial. What I would like to see is the documentary material in the club's archives that suggests that green was moved in 1948.

My concern is that if Dunphy really had the authority we think he did, and thus not needing committee nor board approval, perhaps the only records of Wilson's work would be cancelled checks and the accounting ledger.  Neither of which are likely to be made available to a historian.

[TEPaul]

J.C.

The way I look at a history book like James Dodson's on Seminole is he was looking at something when he wrote what he did about Wilson doing the 18th green for Dunphy in 1948. I have no idea what he might've been looking at but I just don't see a club history book writer just making up a bunch of colloquial stuff like that. I'm not saying it's historically accurate but I just don't see a writer like Dodson just making that stuff up himself with absolutely nothing to go on.

[JC Jones]

J.C.

The way I look at a history book like James Dodson's on Seminole is he was looking at something when he wrote what he did about Wilson doing the 18th green for Dunphy in 1948. I have no idea what he might've been looking at but I just don't see a club history book writer just making up a bunch of colloquial stuff like that. I'm not saying it's historically accurate but I just don't see a writer like Dodson just making that stuff up himself with absolutely nothing to go on.

I agree, unless he was going off of the memory of older members.  Stories change in our minds over time.

[Patrick_Mucci]

[quote author=TEPaul link=topic=43296.msg1196080#msg1196080

Pat:

I think you and I have a very different way of approaching club and course history or frankly any history.
From knowing you and reading you on here as long as I have, I feel you are one of those people who just believes people make mistakes all the time and commonly.

That's right, i feel that people do make mistakes, especially well intended members who craft club histories as an avocation, and in your reply # 118 you confirm same, stating that Seminole made a mistake in citing the date of Wilson's shifting of the 18th green in 1947-8.  

So I guess, by your own admission, I'm correct, people do make mistakes all the time, especially with club histories and/or dating photos and/or documents, and that's why you can't take as "the Gospel" everything you read in club histories.

You can't take me to task for feeling that people make mistakes regarding club histories and then cite instances where people made mistakes crafting club histories.  Surely even you see the contradiction and hypocrisy  
 

When it comes to recording contemporaneous history (if it is done and comprehensively) I don't believe I agree with you.

Wait a second, in your reply # 118 you stated that Seminole was wrong about the date Wilson shifted the green on# 18.
HOW can you not agree with me ?

I'm no expert in deciphering fact from fiction when it comes to club histories, but time and time again you've shown that neither are you.

Clubs and people make mistakes, especially when, as a hobby or lark, they embark upon these projects.

My only interest is in getting the facts right, not blindly defending the status quo.



For instance, the recent Seminole history book goes into a certain amount of detail about the people and opinions and the particulars of the movement of the 18th green in 1948.

Yet, in reply # 118, you tell us that Seminole was wrong on the date

I know a lot of golf history book writers but I don't know James Dodson who wrote Seminoles fairly recently. Somehow the quotations he uses and the colloquialisms of some his comments lead me to believe his stuff cannot be just made up out of the blue.

How do reconcile that with your declaration that he was wrong on that issue ?  ?  ?

You can't have it both ways.

Me, unlike you, I still feel the 1953 aerial indicates that the green was moved previously, but I will concede that my eyesight may be leading me astray

I believe in Mark B's aerials but first and foremost I would like to see the archival material Dodson was using to write that recent Seminole history book.

They BOTH CAN'T BE RIGHT

YOU believe in Mark's aerials, you've stated same, so what difference can Dodson's archival material indicate other than the fact that you were wrong to believe in Mark's aerials ?  ?  ?
[/quote]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

Please get some kind of grip on yourself and stop just putting words in other peoples' mouths. I absolutely NEVER said 'these people never make mistakes.' I have found more mistakes in history books  of more golf clubs than you, MacWood and Moriarty combined have ever dreamed of doing. The most significant, in my opinion, was Pine Valley!!!

Yes, I guess your eye sight is bad because to me there is no question that 1953 aerial shows only the old green.

And yes, the Seminole history book says Wilson moved the 18th in 1948, I believe they are wrong about that due to the evidence in that 1953 aerial. What I would like to see is the documentary material in the club's archives that suggests that green was moved in 1948.

TE,

Then why would you take me to task for stating that people make mistakes, when by your own admission and declaration you claim that Seminole made a mistake ?

Originally you defended, blindly, the info in "The Story of Seminole" and now you're refuting it.

And you criticized my research and historical analysis ??  ?

Surely you see the irony 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Hey, I just remembered something from the club history that may square things with Amos Jones: the history says Wilson was hired after the '49 hurricane to "soften" the greens. It's right there in the history: Wilson flattened the greens.

Anyway, here's a purely speculative timeline:

• 1942-45 greens shrunk (source: club history)
  
• 2 hurricanes, one major, sweep the area -> club throws hands up, says something's got to be done (speculation)
• 1948 Wilson hired (history), comes up with plan to move 18 green but is delayed by (speculation)
• Aug 1949 bad hurricane (NOAA + history) delays Wilson's initial plan (speculation)
• 1950 Wilson hired after hurricane to change fairways, flash bunkers, flatten greens, and relocate 18 green (history), does the maintenance stuff required to get course in playing shape but needs time to revisit his original plan or club decides not to do the big stuff with the maintenance stuff (speculation)
• 1950-53 Dunphy changes mind, tells Wilson to leave the greens alone (speculation)
• 1950-53 someone tells Dunphy what to do (move 3 and 18 greens) and how to do it
• 1953-58 someone moves 3 green back (aerial)
• 1955 Dunphy moves 3 tee 20 yards back (history)
• 1958-68 someone moves 18 green left into dune (aerial)
• 1959 Dunphy grasses over drainage ditch in 14 fairway (history) note: only Ross's 1929 plan shows the ditch traversing the fairway; all aerials show grass

Other possibilities:
Wilson hired to move greens in 1948 and/or 1950, comes up with plan, club executes plan without Wilson and doesn't get around to it for several years.
Wilson hired in 1948 and/or 1950 to move greens, doesn't actually move them for several years.
Amos Jones, elected President under the name Dwight David Eisenhower, flattens all greens and moves two of them when not lobbying ANGC to chop down Loblolly pine on 17.

The one thing I see as irreconcilable is who to believe: von Hagge, who said Wilson was told not to touch the greens, or the club history, which says Wilson was hired in 1949 to, among other things, "soften" the greens.

Unless of course, Wilson got the directive to change / move the greens, and then later got the directive not to touch them. That's possible, too, isn't it?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark,

It might be more accurate to describe the shifting of the 3rd green to the SSW rather than back.
It was already into the bench of the dune next to the 4th tee and couldn't go any further west.
It had to go SSW, not west.

As to the conflicting statements, I don't know if one or the other is to be accepted.
And, you have to consider that perhaps neither are accurate.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Patrick, it's interesting to consider the motive for moving the hole and your post suggests a possibility I hadn't considered:

1) lengthen hole;
2) protect green from flooding;
3) enable stronger players to reach in two -- would it?

These are not mutually exclusive.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, it's interesting to consider the motive for moving the hole and your post suggests a possibility I hadn't considered:

1) lengthen hole;
2) protect green from flooding;
3) enable stronger players to reach in two -- would it?

These are not mutually exclusive.

Mark,

There was NO need to elevate the 3rd green any higher, it was already close to the higher points at Seminole, sitting well above the lower fairways.

Lengthening the hole makes sense as it's not a long hole, even lengthened.

Stronger and decent players can reach the 3rd green with the right wind conditions, today, and in the past.

Drainage doesn't appear to be a factor.

When you consider that all of Seminole's par 5's are relatively short, lengthening # 3 would seem the most likely candidate, but, that doesn't rule out other reasons.

When we review Augusta's history, it isn't uncommon that a suggestion by a respected golfer gets enacted.
In light of the parade of respected golfers who visited and played Seminole, it wouldn't surprise me if the suggestion to alter the hole came from one of them.

[JC Jones]

Mark,

The problem I see is we have conflicting information.  Pat Mucci said Von Hagge wasn't hired by Wilson until 1955.  Von Hagge told me that he was with Wilson when Wilson was hired by Dunphy to do all the work you described EXCEPT Von Hagge said, specifically, that Dunphy told Wilson NOT to touch the green surfaces other than to re-grass them because they had deteriorated.  The contours were not to be changed because the greens were, in Dunphy's words and Von Hagge used it repeatedly, "sacrosanct."

[Patrick_Mucci]

JC,

To add some context, Robert von Hagge was born in 1930, age 25 in 1955 when he started with Wilson.
Some sources have him joining Wilson in 1957, but, 1955 was the year he was hired as an apprentice.

Von Hagge attended Annapolis for two years, then transfered to Purdue where he graduated in 1951.

Between 1951 and 1955 he spent a few years on the PGA Tour, worked as a club Pro in NY and tried an acting stint, joining Wilson thereafter.

In 1947, when Wilson was initially retained, von Hagge was in high school in Indiana.