[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

I think he tells us what the purpose is - to prove your contention wrong that he doesn't have internal documents.

BTW, even if those don't show a contract with Tillie to design the course (I didn't see that in a quick review) he has still posted an equal number of documents as you have to bolster your contention that its not a cut and dried case.

How can you start a thread saying you have done a lot of research, and think Tillie was not the sole designer, and not post one iota of those documents to prove your contention?

This is about the clearest example of your intent here, which is mostly to piss off other people, as far as I can tell.  It certainly isn't to promote open and honest discussion of gca attribution because you just ask leading questions, and withhold anything you might have.  Its probably time for us to make the same accusation you made of Phil, no?  Either you have documents countering the Tillie attribution or you don't?

Why do you ask questions on this thread, if none of them shed any light on who did what at Shawnee?

[Mike Cirba]

I find it very telling how the term "construction" almost always back then referred to both the routing, design, and building phases, including agronomics.

It makes perfect semse...these guys were constructing golf courses, and they didn't make such specialized distinctions to the different parts of the job as we do todAy.

Such a historic understanding helps explain a lot of things that may seem strange to us today when viewed only from our modern understanding and perspectives.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,  yes Phil tells what his purpose is and in the process confirms just how much trouble Phil is having processing even the simplest information.  Tom MacWood never accused Pjil of lying about access to the records.  TM accused Phil of bluffing when Phil suggested that these internal records made Phil's case. That is still an open question, and one which the docs posted by Phil don't answer.

Like with Phil claiming TM called him a liar, he is off his rocker here too. I have no doubt that Phil thinks the docs make the case, but the way Phil is processing this stuff, who knows?

Also you are wrong about Tom not offering anything.  The article I posted above is from TomM.  I only posted it for him.

What is YOUR purpose here Jeff?  Because I find it odd that you of all people would scold Tom MacWood for backing up his positions.   You seem to have an opinion on about everything, but I don't ever recall you producing any novel facts to back it up.  And like here many of your opinions are based on a twisted or misrepresented version of facts others have comE up with.


Mike Cirba,  so you've decided to take your Merion argument on the road?   Pretty funny to see the extent to which you will go to avoid acknowledging the obvious.

[Tom MacWood]

"Unless you now want to call him a LIAR and call every other majopr golf writer at the time who praised Tilly for his design at Shawnee, and who didn't mention Worthington as doing anything in that regard."

Phil-the-author
I had a feeling you were bluffing. First of all because you pulled this trick before on the North Shore thread. At the time you were trying to make the case Tilly could have designed NS even though he never listed it on his master list. You produced your own list of eight or ten courses you claimed he designed, but never listed. When you were asked to support your list you said you couldn't because of an impending book. I then proceded to go down you list course by course showing why your list was bogus. The second reason I thought you were bluffing is your continued boasting you have internal documents, so therefore I guess we are supposed to believe these documents make your case. But when you were trying to prove Shawnee was a solo job instead of saying I have internal documents to prove it, you said old articles say Tilly designed Shawnee on his own, and anyone who doubts those articles is calling Tilly and every major golf writer a liar. By the way I don't believe every major golf writer wrote that Shawnee was a Tilly solo job.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom and David,

You make it quite apparent that NEITHER of you has anything to offer.

David, you are wrong in everything you stated which is why so many others got on tom's case fopr calling me a LIAR!

Tom, so you are STILL calling me a LIAR after everything I posted? I'm sorry, but I will NOT post what is in those documents. With your attitude you will most likely accuse me of alterring them.

All this because you wouldn't accept that Worthington hiored an "untested and inexperienced" person to desuign Shawnee. THAT is what this all goes back to.

[DMoriarty]

Phillip,

Go back and read what TomM wrote.  It leaves no doubt that he thought you were bluffing about whether those internal documents support your case. 

I guess now I understand some or your bizarre posts, like where you demanded I call Shawnee!  But how you could have gotten this wrong when TM explained it repeatedly is beyond me.    And to think you have been been going from thread to thread demanding TM apologize for something he never even said.  You even tried to drag Ran into it, didn't you?   

Get a grip Phil.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Niether Phil or I are as stupid as you portray in your attacks on us.  You always presume that someone who disagrees with you must be an idiot, but that is nothing but arrogance on your part, not reality.

BTW, the one document you (finally when others didn't do it, and thanks for that) confirmed Tillie was the designer as much as anything.  So, one piece that goes against TMacs initial thread idea, and none of his extenisve reading and researching to support his original thesis has been presented by him.  NONE.  

Can I pull a David M here and ask why it is YOU can't understand one of the simplest words of the English language.  NONE means NONE, David, no matter how you try to parse it.

BTW, liar, bluffer, in this context is all the same.  And I just see where TMac is again pushing his theory, without posting any supporting documents while chastising Phil yet again, and letting it spill over into the old NOrth Shore thread, too.  It seems to be a double standard, to me.

When we don't agree with your interpretations, you playing defense by going on offense - such as when you won't answer a question but demand others do, name calling, etc. isn't good or logical argument - its just argumentative.

You posting one document can't be construed as you having take the road of the high and mighty re: interest in history either.

And like everyone else on here, I am naturally curious about whatever those old course documents, pictures, etc. show.  I haven't done the research Tom Mac has, and always appreciate it when he and others show old stuff from any course.  I don't always agree 100% with his analysis, but that falls under what would be natural disagrements between reasonable men.

I stand by my stance the TMac is out of bounds on the idea of this thread by posting a theory with no evidence and then demanding absolute proof from Phil.  It is simply a tactic that is guaranteed to start a flame war, whether intentional or not, but in context of other discussions here, I think Tom made an intentional judgement, in pursuing a personal agenda against others on this board, rather than intelligently discussion the history of Shawnee.  That is not always the case with Tom, but I regret to say, I believe it is in this case.

David, at one time, your responses to me were civil, or about in proportion to whatever I dished out your way, and I felt like we had sort of an understanding about each other, and I respected you.  Lately, nearly every one of your posts lashes out, attacks, and questions other posters, all while accusing them of doing the same. (and not coincidentally, provides less substantive contributions than before)  I wish you would go back to some semblance of rationality, but you seem to have completely lost it from what I read on these boards.  We can deal with difficult Dave, but not demented Dave!

Its certainly time for all of us to take a Merion and Shawnee break, for the benefit of all.

[Phil_the_Author]

Sorry David, I don't have to go back and re-read what Tom posted. YOU need to go back and read EVERYTHING that Tom posted and you will see that he plainly called me a liar for not posting ANYTHING that I was given by Shawnee. ANYTHING!

And for one very last time, remember, this all started because Tom Macwood could not accept that Tillinghast was the proven exception to his "theory," which he has argued to death as fact, that by 1910 no one would hire someone who was "inexperienced and untested" to design a golf course. That is EXACTLY what Tillinghast was and EXACTLY what Worthington did.

David, I have no problem accepting from anyone that they believe that Tom did not call me a liar, but not from you. Your agenda is more than clear. It is obvious in statements such as "I guess now I understand some or your bizarre posts, like where you demanded I call Shawnee!"

Tell the entire truth on that one David because anyone can go back and look through the thread and see what really took place. I originally told Tom that HE could call Shawnee and confirm that I had the documents. He never did. He told him that in response to my statement that if I made myself a LIAR to the owner of Shawnee  by posting the documents that I had agreed not to publish then he'd, and lets QUOTE HIM, "WITHDRAW HIS ACCUSATIONS!"

Well, now I've gotten permission to post what I would like on here. I post the proof that I have the documents and yet that is simply not good enough for Tom & You. Did you ever even consider that if he had done what he had said he would do and "withdraw his ACCUSATIONS" that maybe I would have posted more of them and maybe even included those which he'd most like to see? Of course not, that would never enter into his or your mind. No, BOTH of you would rather have me be a liar to the Shawnee ownership.

So David, when I suggested, NOT "DEMANDED" as you once again arrogantly in your misrepresentation of what I actually said claim, that you call Rob Howell at Shawnee and he would CONFIRM EVERYTHING THAT I CLAIMED I had, I also said that doing so was a little thing. Why did I say that? Because both YOU & TOM said that I could end all of this by doing the "little thing" of posting them and making myself a liar.

I actually gave you and Tom very easy outs on that. Actually anyone from on site can feel free to call and ask Rob Howell and he'll CONFIRM that he gave me all of the documents that I claimed to possess and MORE!

One last thing, I didn't "drag" Ran into this. I asked him for advice, I asked him to act as a go-between and I asked him to talk to Tom to try to persuade him to speak with me and end this privately. Tom chose this, NOT ME! And since you brought Ran back up, feel free to confirm with him what he suggested to me on the phone originally, that I post the proof and EMBARRASS TOM! Those were his EXACT words.

David, all you want to do is argue. I am done with you on this.

[Mike Cirba]

Mike Cirba,  so you've decided to take your Merion argument on the road?   Pretty funny to see the extent to which you will go to avoid acknowledging the obvious.


David,

No need to discuss Merion.   It's your basic misunderstanding of the terminology of the time period, your lack of substantive supporting evidence to support your positions, and your twisting of words and facts that is at issue here.

But since you mentioned Merion, I'll mention that your theory rests on a number of faulty assumptions, with one big one being the name of Hugh Wilson's Committee, the "Construction Committee".   In your paper you argue that it was called that because it had no design role, but simply was charged with building the course to others' specifications.

Here's two articles about Pine Valley written by Tillinghast early in 1913 months before Harry Colt arrived.

Note the name of the Committee in the bottom article.   It's clear that 1) Crump and his committee were designing and building the course and 2) the overwhelming use of amateur architects made up of top local players around Philadelphia to design and develop courses continued almost unabated up until WWI, at Merion, Pine Valley, Philadelphia Cricket, Philadelphia Country Club, Huntingdon Valley, LuLu, North Hills, and a number of others.

Guy like Phil and I will continue to provide evidence and facts, you and Tom go ahead and post nonsense like self-derived lists and wild speculation that only have meaning to the uninformed, those predisposed to buying into flimsy conspiracy theories, or those with simply a passing interest who may not know better..

January 12, 1913




March 23, 1913



   

[DMoriarty]

That is ridiculous Phil.   You've been self-righteously demanding that TM apologize for something he didn't say, and because you again failed to understand the simplest statement.  Look at what he wrote, for goodness sakes.   Now you are lashing out at me, because you refuse to consider that it was you who were wrong from the beginning.

I don't know what is going on with you but I assure you I have no interest in arguing with you or even discussing anything with you Phil.   You seem to have lost your ability to understand even the simplest things, and keep flying off the handle based on some pretty incomprehensible interpretations.  Perhaps you should consider taking a step back and getting a grip.  

Good Luck.

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

To quote that great philosopher Archie Bunker... 

[Tom MacWood]

Phil-the-author
You implied you had internal documents that proved Shawnee was a Tilly solo job, and I said you were bluffing. Have you presented any internal documents proving Shawnee was a solo job? Me thinks you protest too much. You are bluffing.

[Ian Larson]

Twood,

You still have to prove otherwise which you cant. Phil has shown over and over that he has access to documents that you never will but would love to. Give it up or get out. Move on to your next useless conquest.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom the Macwood,

You are beyond reasoning with this. I have posted NUMEROUS times that I am NOT IMPLYING ANYTHING that I am DEFINITELY stating that I have ALL the documents and that there is NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that Tilly designed Shawnee by himself, oversaw the construction, redesigned it in 1912/13 by himself, redesigned and tweaked it a number of times through the years all the way up to and including the for the 1938 PGA Championship.

You might think I protest too much but I know for a certainty that you are wrong and continue to call me a liar as you just did again saying "You are bluffing." You are a fool and this is over.

[DMoriarty]

Ian, I  don't think it is Tom's burden to disprove that the records back up Phil's claim, given that Phil has never established that they prove it.

You and Phil seem to have caught a touch that nasty ailment tepaulitis, a malady which causes those infected to mistakenly believe that access equates to knowledge and understanding.  It doesn't.

[Mike Cirba]

It's hardly surprising that both Tom MacWood and David Moriarty choose to ignore the Tillinghast articles on Pine Valley, as their content simply demolishes several of their most preciously held myths they've tried for many years to perpetuate on this website, all in one shot.

The irony of Tilly blowing away their specious theories on a thread where they attempted to slight his authorship of his very first design is simply delicious poetic justice.

[Dan Herrmann]

Tom MacWood,
When you have a chance, could you reply to the question my friend Eric Pevoto posed in post #2?

[Tom MacWood]

Where did I say he wasn't the primary architect?

[TEPaul]

"You and Phil seem to have caught a touch that nasty ailment tepaulitis, a malady which causes those infected to mistakenly believe that access equates to knowledge and understanding.  It doesn't."


Unfortunately for you and Tom MacWood it does. Every researcher/historian whose analysis of a golf course or architect of a subject course (Merion and Wilson) has any credibility has had significant access to the subject club and its archives.

[Dan Herrmann]

Tom MacWood,
Regarding reply #169:   Fair enough.  Therfore, could you offer your answer to your own question from post #1, "Who designed Shawnee"?

[Phil_the_Author]

Dan,

DON'T give Tom Macwood a pass on his seemingly benign statement "Where did I say he wasn't the primary architect?"

On the Top Courses thread, Tom stated the following as FACT "Golf architecture advanced to the point where there were no inexperienced, untested architects operating in 1910."  

I challenged him on this point and in my reply #50 stated "Nonsense! A.W. Tillinghast was both inexperienced and untested and yet had designed Shawnee by late 1909 and was overseeing its construction throughout 1910 and had done neither before those years."

This started a series of back and forth posts where Tom answered, acknowledged and/or commented on parts of every one of my posts yet would not answer the question as I posted it in #56 "Since you chose to ignore my disagreement with your contention that "Golf architecture advanced to the point where there were no inexperienced, untested architects operating in 1910..." I'll ask you 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 got all the way down to my post #131 where I again asked "You stated that, "Golf architecture advanced to the point where there were no inexperienced, untested architects operating in 1910..." [bold, italics, underline mine] In 1910 Tilly was overseeing the construction of his just finished design at Shawnee. How can you possibly say then that he was NOT inexperienced and untested as an architect in 1910?"

And then TOM ANSWERED with this in post #147:

His associate at Shawnee, Mr. Worthington, had a great deal of experience.

So now Tom has both downplayed Tilly’s role as SOLE designer by denying it, he also relegated Tilly to the position of JUNIOR PARTNER in this!

After I challenged him on that line stating that Worthington was both Tilly's design "associate" on Shawnee and that he had a "great deal of experience" he again responded, now more than a bit sarcastically, "Phil-the-author, Are you disputing the fact that CC Worthington had a wealth of experience?  If you don't think Worthington was actively involved in the design of Shawnee I've got a used car I'd like to sell you, it was owned by a little old lady who only drove it to church on Sundays."

On this thread, after showing his ineptitude and demanding someone post the Country Club Life article that Tilly wrote about Shawnee in 1914, he stated in this post #123 “I'm referring to the article...his account of the project. He [Tillinghast] never mentions in the article he designed the golf course; he emphasizes his construction role. "

In fact, on one of the other threads, before I posted the quote where Tilly stated that he "was the ARCHITECT of SHAWNEE" in an article about the course, Tom even stated that he never questioned that Tilly was the person in charge of CONSTRUCTION!

No, Dan, Tom never stated the words "Tilly wasn't the primary architect" but, then again he did say:

1- Tilly was a design associate of WORTHINGTON on the project.
2- WORTHINGTON was the very EXPERIENCED golf course architect of the two.
3- Tilly didn't claim that he was the DESIGNER of the course in the Country Club Life article
4- That "If you don't think Worthington was actively involved in the design of Shawnee I've got a used car I'd like to sell you[/i], it was owned by a little old lady who only drove it to church on Sundays."

Now how could anyone with even a miniscule ability to reason believe that with those statements that Tom Macwood has NOT stated that:

1- WORTHINGTON was in charge and was the MAJOR designer of Shawnee.
2- Tilly's role was one PRIMARILY of CONSTRUCTION Manager.

And then Tom states on this thread several times that "I have NO IDEA who designed Shawnee[/b]."

What a load of crap! Be honest Tom the MAC, and admit that you HAVE been stating that Worthington was both one of and lead designer of the course. If you have that belief, FINE! Then back it up with facts if you can. But DON'T deny that you haven't stated it because you have!

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,
Regarding reply #169:   Fair enough.  Therfore, could you offer your answer to your own question from post #1, "Who designed Shawnee"?

Dan
I don't know who did what which is why I started this thread. The article I posted (written by Tilly) gives the impression the two men may have at least studied the site together initially. Based on the fact Worthington had already laid out three courses (at least) to that point, and the fact that he was heavily involved in golf course maintenance, and the fact that Tilly had no experence, it is not too far fetched to expect Worthington was involved someway in the design of his golf course. In fact I would say it is likely. The other thing that stood out in that article is Tilly's emphasis on his role as the primary construction supervisor, and not mentioning anything about designing the golf course.

[TEPaul]

Dan:

It looks like you got an answer to your question to Tom MacWood. However, as I'm sure you can see from his answer to your question, he does seem to have a remarkably "compartmentalized" way of thinking and reasoning. One might say he just has blinders on.

Another good example of that is that he keeps asking for someone to explain to him how an inexperienced insurance salesman like Hugh Wilson could have been called on by MCC to design the East and West courses.

Apparently it has never even occured to him that Hugh Wilson may not have been ONLY an inexperienced insurance salesman; he may've had some truly inherent talent for golf course architecture and the men of MCC apparently knew that and understood or they probably would not have picked him to chair the committee to create the East and West courses!!   

But apparently Tom MacWood's assumption is that he really couldn't have had any inherent talent for architecture and therefore the men of Merion actually picked someone else to design the courses and then all got together and agreed to lie about it for the unlikely purpose of making some kind of icon and hero out of a young inexperienced insurance salesman!!

Huh???   

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You keep painting yourslef into an impossible corner.

"I don't know who did what which is why I started this thread..." I'll agree completely that you don't know who did what at Shawnee. As for why you started this thread, others beside myself have already stated their beliefs on that subject at the beginning of this thread.

"The article I posted" get it right Tom since you DIDN'T post it, David Moriarity did "(written by Tilly) gives the impression the two men may have at least studied the site together initially." That they certainly did they even crossed the Binniekill walking on the ice in the winter of 1909. Do you know WHY THEY DID THAT? There is a VERY GOOD REASON. Let's see if you can figure it out on your own.

"Based on the fact Worthington had already laid out three courses (at least) to that point" Worthington built 6 holes on his estate at Irving-on-Hudson. He would supervise the design and construction of 9 holes for the Caladeno Golf Club.  This doesn't mean that he either designed or laid the course out himself. He did lay out the 9-holes of the Manwalamink Golf Club on Depuy Island. So with all that experience, the question must be asked WHY would he HIRE Tillinghast to DESIGN the golf course at all?

"and the fact that he was heavily involved in golf course maintenance" That is patently incorrect. The only aspect of golf course "maintenance" that he was invovled in before and after Shawnee was the Worthington Mower Company. The first gang-mower that he invented was a horse-drawn one in 1906 which cut the fairway grass at Manwalamink. That was it. He was NOT "heavily involved" in golf course maintenance as he had both a crew and soperintendent caring for the course and his properties. You can find that information in the records. That was it until 1919 when he developed a gas-powered tractor for pulling the mowers and expanded the gang-mower idea.

"and the fact that Tilly had no experence" Really? Wasn't it YOU who mentioned Tilly's building of the "rudimentary course" in Frankford in 1898 as PROOF that he was EXPERIENCED on the other thread when I challenged you on this very point? You're beginning to speak out of both sides of your mouth now.

"it is not too far fetched to expect Worthington was involved someway in the design of his golf course. In fact I would say it is likely."

Maybe you would, but the records say OTHERWISE!

"The other thing that stood out in that article is Tilly's emphasis on his role as the primary construction supervisor, and not mentioning anything about designing the golf course." You leave out a VERY IMPORTANT point here Tom. In the article Tilly also NEVER STATES that WORTHINGTON had ANYTHING to do with the design, laying out, building, finishing, maintenance or anything else with the creation of the golf course at Shawnee. In fact, there isn't a SINGLE article written by Tilly where he gives Worthington credit for any aspect of any of the above. NONE. He does, however, in numerous articles and publications, call himself the "ARCHITECT" of Shawnee. EVERY golf writer of his day credited the course design to him and none EVER mentioned Worthington as having any hand in it at all.

You want everyone to believe that WORTHINGTON was the LEAD designer at Shawnee (see my post above where you clearly stated such) and yet you also say thyat "I don't know who did what at Shawnee." That jaw has to be hurting pretty badly by now from talking out of both sides of it.

Maybe the biggest irony in this is that you keep pounding away on Merion asking "Why would they hire an inexperienced and untested insurance salesman like Wilson" as if that is some sort of proof, yet here YOU HAVE STATED that Worthington hired an INEXPERIENCED and UNTESTED Tillinghast to take part in designing Shawnee since you referred to his being Worthington's design "ASSOCIATE" on it.

Yep, that mouth of yours is getting a real two-sided workout...

Finally Tom, do YOU know what WORTHINGTON was doing from 1906-1911 that would PREVENT HIS HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH DESIGNING OR LAYING OUT THE GOLF COURSE? Now there's a question that provides answers to everything! By the way, I do!

[Dan Herrmann]

TEPaul and Philip,
Exactly what I was getting at.

I've been asking for a while why Fownes was so successful at Oakmont, but others as inexperienced would have been failures.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()