[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

With all due respect, if that's the case you're trying to make I think you missed the.mark.

Seriously, what do you think were the driving reasons that the ethos of clubs like Merion and NGLA both seemed so proud to have designed their courses without using professionals?

Apples and oranges. CBM was a seasoned amateur when he took up the NGLA project, and he surrounded himself with other seasoned amateurs. CBM was one of the most famous and well respected men in golf, on both sides of the Atlantic. Wilson was an untested, inexperienced insurances salesman.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
No I'm not trying to make the case the powers-to-be at Merion were idiots, I'm making the case that in 1910 if you aspired for anything good you hired a seasoned professional or amateur, which why they engaged Barker and CBM."


I understand your point. However, the record (recently found 1910 and 1911 MCC committee and board records) make it crystal clear MCC never engaged Barker at all and they also make it remarkably clear what Macdonald/Whigam did for them and what Wilson and his committee did for them. Matter of fact, the MCC record of this time makes it crystal clear MCC never "hired" anyone at all (in the sense of paying anyone for design of the East and West courses)! It is my recent understanding that Merion plans to chronicle it all in detail soon.

Therefore, let's not continue this subject of Merion on this website as I think you're aware that Ran Morrissett has indicated by the locking of that Desmond Tolhurst thread of yours and his promise to lock any others like it in the future. Try not to turn this thread into another one of those, Tom MacWood.

Thank you.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
The record shows the powers-that-be engaged both Barker and CBM. A very intelligent move I might add. You may want to pretend it never happened, as Wayne Morrison did when he wrote his history of Merion, but there is absolutely no disputing that fact.

[Mike Cirba]

It is indisputable that by 1910 ALL of the very best courses in the US were designed and developed by amateurs within the clubs themselves, as this thread clearly proves.   That was also the model that Merion sought to emulate and why they sought out CBM for advice.

There is not a professionallyy designed course that has even had any discussion here to date on this thread, and probably more than a few raised eyebrows at some of the nomineess, but just like during those days, it obvious wthat the cream has risen to the top.

[Mac Plumart]

Was this thread started to discuss Merion again?

[Tom MacWood]

It is indisputable that by 1910 ALL of the very best courses in the US were designed and developed by amateurs within the clubs themselves, as this thread clearly proves.   That was also the model that Merion sought to emulate and why they sought out CBM for advice.

There is not a professionallyy designed course that has even had any discussion here to date on this thread, and probably more than a few raised eyebrows at some of the nomineess, but just like during those days, it obvious wthat the cream has risen to the top.

I guess you don't like my list, because not all the courses on my list were designed and developed by amateurs.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
The record shows the powers-that-be engaged both Barker and CBM."

Since you've never been to Merion or MCC to see their 'record' from that time I'm quite sure noone could imagine how you would even be in a position to credibly make a statement like that about Barker. Regarding CBM I believe the same applies as to what you haven't seen and consequently don't know.

But I suppose there is no reason to expect that you will not carry on with your usual unsubstantiated opinions and statements about the likes of Merion, Myopia, Pine Valley, North Shore, Aronimink et al.  Nothing wrong with that, I guess, so long as most competent golf course architecture historians and anaylsts realize it.

Carry on-----but a word of warning----eg stray too far back into the subject of Merion's history on this thread and Ran Morrissett may lock this one too!

I should add to anyone reading this thread to note who started IT!

[TEPaul]

"Was this thread started to discuss Merion again?"


Mac:

Good question. For the most accurate answer to your question you should direct your question to the one who actualy started this particular thread. But if you are interested in who first brought up the subject of Merion on this thread I would point you to Post #55!  

[Tom MacWood]

Mac
They cannot help themselves...I would hope you realize that by now.

By the way I don't think Oakmont's lack of reputation was due to its difficult nature. It probably had more to do with its relative isolation, which resulted in lack of national publicity. I don't recall it being included on the tours of Vardon, Ray, Darwin, Leach, and some of the other high profile Brits.

[Tom MacWood]

Atlanta Athletic Club - T.Bendelow (1908), H.Barker (1910)

Beverly - G.O'Neil (1908)

Chicago - CB.Macdonald/HJ.Whigham/J.Foulis (1895), D.Foulis (1910)

Homewood - HJ.Tweedie/J.Pearson (1901), W.Watson (1910)

Ravisloe - J.Foulis (1901), R.White (1903), W.Watson/A.Bauer (1910)

Belmont Springs - D.Ross (1908)

The Country Club - W.Campbell (1894), A.Campbell/H.Windeler (1899), H.Windeler (1910)

Essex County - W.Campbell (1894), D.Ross (1910)

Myopia Hunt - W.Campbell (1894), H.Leeds (1899-1907)

Minikahda - W.Watson/D.Foulis (1899), J.Jaffray/R.Taylor (1906)

Atlantic City - J.Reid (1897), H.Barker (1909)

Baltusrol - L.Keller (1895), T.Gourlay (1896), G.Low (1908-10)

Englewood - J.Hobens (1905)

Apawamis - T.Bendelow (1899), H.Strong (1906-10)

Fox Hills - P.King/D.Brown (1901)

Garden City - D.Emmet/G.Hubbell/A.Findlay (1899), W.Travis (1906-1910)

National - CB.Macdonald/D.Emmet/HJ.Whigham (1909)

Nassau - H.Murdock (1899)

Salisbury - D.Emmet (1908)

Pinehurst #2 - D.Ross/W.Travis (1907)

Mayfield - H.Barker (1909)

Waverly - H.Barker (1910)

Oakmont - H.Fownes (1903)

Ekwanok - JD.Dunn (1899), W.Travis (1905)

Columbia - H.Barker (1910)

[TEPaul]

The professional architect attribution (in bold) on GCGC and Myopia, at least, should be removed as it is largely irrelevant and therefore meaningfully inaccurate as to the architectural attribution and evolution of those two courses.

[Mike Cirba]

What do folks here think were the best 3 courses by a long shot in the states by  1910?

Hint...the initials are G, M, and N!

[TEPaul]

It may not be very important what I think or Tom MacWood thinks or anyone else on here thinks the top courses were in 1910, but I can tell you that in 1904 C.B. Macdonald wrote that it was generally conceded that the best three in America were Myopia, Garden City GC and Chicago GC.

And on June 10, 1910 HH Barker wrote that he thought the best two were Myopia Hunt Club and Garden City GC but that there was approximately 100 acres in Ardmore Pennsylvania whose land was in every way adapted to the making of a first class golf course that would compare favorably to the two best in the country he mentioned! Of course, all of them were the work of "amateur/sportsmen" architects at that time and the members of the latter didn't ask Barker for his opinion of the land in the first place, a real estate developer did. And even though the club didn't let Barker do a course for them in Ardmore Pa and instead picked an inexperienced novice who was an insurance man to chair a committee of four other inexperienced members to design the course, its routing and architecture would be considered some of the best in the country and the world anyway, and it would end up hosting more USGA championships than any other.

Also, quite ironically, that "dumb-luck" insurance man/committee chairman and novice architect would actually write five years after beginning that if he and his other inexperienced committeemen knew in the beginning what they realized five years later they never would have begun it or done it in the first place. 

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

That's correct...here's what Mr. Barker said about Myopia and Garden City.   At the time, June 1910, NGLA had not opened yet, and would have a soft opening with an Invitational Tournament for about a dozen players in July 1910, and open to the membership the following year.   Still, even that early it was generally acknowledged as the top course produced by American golf.



In a similar vein, here's what Max Behr thought...



Here's some mentions of Myopia and NGLA from Alex Findlay;





I find it also very interesting to consider the club ethos that would lead to Macdonald and NGLA almost bragging that no professional architectural advice would be sought for the course they were going to build as this December 1906 article makes clear;



That to me rings very closely to what Alan Wilson wrote about the origins of Merion, when he similarly said;

"There were unusual and interesting features connected with the beginnings of these two courses which should not be forgotten. First of all, they were both “Homemade”. When it was known that we must give up the old course, a “Special Committee on New Golf Grounds”—composed of the late Frederick L. Baily. S.T. Bodine, E.C. Felton, H.G. Lloyd, and Robert Lesley, Chairman, chose the site; and a “Special Committee” DESIGNED and BUILT the two courses without the help of a golf architect."

As regards this whole silliness that by 1910 any serious club picked a pro to design their course, here's some articles from 1916...

[Phil_the_Author]

Sorry Mike,

I have to disagree with your statement, "As regards this whole silliness that by 1910 any serious club picked a pro to design their course..."

As he was paid for his design and to oversee the course construction, A.W. Tillinghast was a professional the moment he was hired by C.C. Worthington to design and build Shawnee in 1909.

Did this signal the beginning of amateur players turning professional designers? It would take some research and it may very well be, but the point is that there were many serious courses being designed and buiilt by amateurs turned professionals and, more importantly, professionals turned professional architects prior to 1910. That the handful of the best courses were the product of amateur designers is more coincidence than proof of superiority, as professional or amateur, the golf course architecture design industry in America was in its extreme infancy in those years. In fact, I would think that the vast preponderance of BAD courses designed during these years were designed by amateurs and members. That is why so many courses were being redesigned, rerouted, expanded, extended and added to between 1911 & 1930.

Between 1910 and 1920 the monies that a good professional architect would charge and get increased by 20 or more fold as many were getting only $100 or so (if that) to stake out or lay out a course whereas Tilly & Ross were getting $2,000 & more for an 18-hole design by then.

[Mike Cirba]

Phil,

I'm not sure you're disagreeing with what I'm disagreeing with.  

Tom MacWood made a statement to the effect that by 1910 any serious club was looking to a professional to design or modify their course, speaking primarily about foreign professional golfers like Barker who also did course layouts to earn some extra money..

That statement is patently and provably untrue, as you know.   MUCH work continued to be done at top-notch clubs by amateur designers up until WWI and even beyond as seen in the work of Macdonald, Wilson, Crump, Smith, et.al. as these articles illustrate.  

I would not disagree that at the point AW Tillinghast accepted a commission from Worthington to design Shawnee that he moved from amateur golfer to professional architect, but I'm not sure how that relates to Tom's contention?   Did I miss something or simply not explain my point very well the first time?

[Tom MacWood]

The professional architect attribution (in bold) on GCGC and Myopia, at least, should be removed as it is largely irrelevant and therefore meaningfully inaccurate as to the architectural attribution and evolution of those two courses.

Do you think it over accentuates the professionals or the amateurs?

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

You make the mistake in assuming that because I disagree with your contention that I agree with Tom Macwood; I don't because I disagree with you both. The reason I do is because you are BOTH demanding absolutes as the answer to this question when the real answer lies squarely in the middle.

First of all, you contend that ALL, and I believe you really mean MOST of the best courses by 1910 had or were being designed by amateur architects. While the 2 or 3 best were, there were also a very large number of very good courses that both had and were being designed by Professional Architects by 1910. Tilly's Shawnee is but one example.

It is also the clear example that I gave numerous times when I challenged Tom on his own absolute contention that "Golf architecture advanced to the point where there were no inexperienced, untested architects operating in 1910..."

Now Tom keeps ignoring this question and refusing to answer every time I ask, "if you then considered A.W. Tillinghast who had just finished his design of Shawnee and was now overseeing its construction, both of which were firsts for him, was actually experienced and tested in 1910, and if so, what you could possibly base it on?"

It has been such an obvious ignorance of both question and fact that even Mac Plumart called him to task on it, something that Mac never does.

Any list of the top 25 courses in America, even one where Barker is credited for participating in the design of 1/5 of them is bound to find a mixture of both professional and amateur architects...

[TEPaul]

"Do you think it over accentuates the professionals or the amateurs?"

Accentuation has nothing to do with it. The professional attribution in both is simply meaningfully inaccurate and irrelevant to the designs of both courses.

[Tom MacWood]

The professional architect attribution (in bold) on GCGC and Myopia, at least, should be removed as it is largely irrelevant and therefore meaningfully inaccurate as to the architectural attribution and evolution of those two courses.

TEP
Based on your research ability, or should I say inability, you would be the last person anyone would listen to regarding attributions.

[TEPaul]

"I would not disagree that at the point AW Tillinghast accepted a commission from Worthington to design Shawnee that he moved from amateur golfer to professional architect,"


I would. When Tillinghast accepted a commission to do Shawnee he was considered to be an amateur golfer of skill. At that point the USGA had not even specifically decided or legislated the amateur status question regarding accepting remuneration for architecture. That issue would be decided in the teens and into the later teens the whole issue became even more complex and controversial until the early 1920s when the USGA instituted the so-called "Architect Exception" to the USGA Rule on Amateur Status. With Shawnee and into the teens Tillinghast may've taken money for architecture but he did not consider himself to be a professional golfer. When he was informed his amateur status was in question, in his own defense he pointed out there had been no USGA Rule or regulation debarring an amateur golfer of skill from accepting remuneration for architecture. Technically he was correct but then the USGA wrote legislation making it possible to debar amateur golfers of skill for accepting remuneration for architecture thereby losing their amateur playing status. I have maintained that I believe it was C.B. Macdonald who actually wrote that legislation in the teens. Matter of fact, I believe Tillinghast played in the 1910 US Open in Philadelphia as an amateur and did very well.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
I included Myopia and GCGC on my list...what is your point? Were there only two top courses in America in 1910? By the way I'm considering adding Barker to my GCGC attribution since he assisted Travis on the redesign.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
Based on your research ability, or should I say inability, you would be the last person anyone would listen to regarding attributions."


Tom MacWood:

You've said that on here for years but thankfully no one agrees with you other than perhaps Moriarty. I would put my analytical ability on the history of architecture up against yours any day and I don't think many have much doubt who is a lot better at it and it sure isn't you. That's probably why your only platform is GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and it seems thankfully you've now begun to lose even that platform due to the kind of illogical and even defamatory remarks you made on that Desmond Tolhurst thread you started that was locked due to your unfortunate remarks. Your credibility on GCA is at an all time low and you have no one to blame for it other than yourself which is the way it should be on here.  
 
 

[Tom MacWood]

"I would not disagree that at the point AW Tillinghast accepted a commission from Worthington to design Shawnee that he moved from amateur golfer to professional architect,"


I would. When Tillinghast accepted a commission to do Shawnee he was considered to be an amateur golfer of skill. At that point the USGA had not even specifically decided or legislated the amateur status question regarding accepting remuneration for architecture. That issue would be decided in the teens and into the later teens the whole issue became even more complex and controversial until the early 1920s when the USGA instituted the so-called "Architect Exception" to the USGA Rule on Amateur Status. With Shawnee and into the teens Tillinghast may've taken money for architecture but he did not consider himself to be a professional golfer. When he was informed his amateur status was in question, in his own defense he pointed out there had been no USGA Rule or regulation debarring an amateur golfer of skill from accepting remuneration for architecture. Technically he was correct but then the USGA wrote legislation making it possible to debar amateur golfers of skill for accepting remuneration for architecture thereby losing their amateur playing status. I have maintained that I believe it was C.B. Macdonald who actually wrote that legislation in the teens. Matter of fact, I believe Tillinghast played in the 1910 US Open in Philadelphia as an amateur and did very well.

TEP
There is a difference between an amateur golfer who never accepts a fee for anything golf related, and an amateur golfer whose profession is golf architecture. Tillinghast,Travis, Emmet, Langford, Colt, Fowler, Simpson, Gannon would fall into the latter category.

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
Based on your research ability, or should I say inability, you would be the last person anyone would listen to regarding attributions."


Tom MacWood:

You've said that on here for years but thankfully no one agrees with you other than perhaps Moriarty. I would put my analytical ability on the history of architecture up against yours any day and I don't think many have much doubt who is a lot better at it and it sure isn't you. That's probably why your only platform is GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and it seems thankfully you've now begun to lose even that platform due to the kind of illogical and even defamatory remarks you made on that Desmond Tolhurst thread you started that was locked due to your unfortunate remarks. Your credibility on GCA is at an all time low and you have no one to blame for it other than yourself which is the way it should be on here.  
 
 

At least I had credibility to lose. You've never been credible....you are the crazy uncle who amuses us all.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()