All the greens and tees were there, before Wilson left for abroad, and of course Wilson and Merion were hoping to pattern at least some of them after the principles of some of the great holes abroad applied to their own natural conditions or why go on the trip at all? Why even go see NGLA in March 1910 for that matter?
This seeming paradox perplexed me too, until I realized two things;
1) Almost all of the great template holes rely on a bunkering strategy, and we know that reports in 1915 said Merion was barely bunkered, and,
2) Wilson and his committee had already seen Macdonald's versions of those holes at NGLA, AS WELL AS his detailed drawings of the great holes abroad during their visit to NGLA pre-design and pre-construction.
Thus, while they may have gotten an idea that certain holes and their locations might have fit the template profile, those things really don't seem to have been applied much prior to him going overseas. Certainly they played around probably with some ideas thinking perhaps the uphill 10th might be a location for an Alps feature with cross-bunkering, or the green up on the hill over the barn might become a redan, but it seems from all accounts that "very little bunkering" took place prior.
Thus, they ended up with holes like today's "redan", where there is no kicker, no way to run the ball in, a green that tilts back to front, but if you stand on the tee, you have the fortress green and a diagonal "redan bunker" to contend with.
The purpose of Wilson's trip was to learn first hand, to create his own sketches, and bring back his own ideas and opinions, so that Merion could apply them over time as they saw fit on their new golf course.
Back when David first posted the Francis article, I realized what i believe is the answer to this quandary, and at the time wrote to him;
“I advised him, preparatory to his trip to Scotland, to watch carefully the seventeenth, or Alps hole, at Prestwick, which he really imagined existed on his new course. He is now convinced that it will take a lot of making to equal that famous old spot”. – Alex Findlay, talking about Hugh Wilson in May 1912 after Wilson’s return from overseas
What do you think Findlay means when he says that it will take a lot of making in this context? As you pointed out, the golf course and the holes have already been routed, the holes on the ground, the greens and tees shaped and seeded, and now growing in. That all happened over the previous year and now the course is months from opening so why would some hole concept still “take a lot of making”, or require much more work to be anything resembling the original?
Let’s examine your timeline again;
1. Wilson has long been credited with designing the course based upon principles he learned while traveling abroad.
2. This assumes he traveled abroad before the course was designed and built.
3. But he did not travel abroad until after the course had been routed, planned, built, and the tees, greens, and fairways seeded, and at least some of the artificial features built.
4. Therefore the initial routing, lay out plan, construction, tees, greens, fairways, and at least some of the artificial features could not have been based on what Wilson learned while traveling abroad.
You may be very surprised to learn that I agree with almost everything you’ve written with the exception perhaps that the first point is an overly broad generalization and oversimplification but the second point is where I’d like to get more specific because I’m not sure it’s a valid assumption.
It’s also why I’ve been asking you for any other specific examples of holes on the original Merion course that you believe were directly influenced by great holes overseas. I want to be sure I address this comprehensively, but I guess we have enough generally agreed examples to work with using holes 3 (redan), 10 (Alps), and 15 green (Eden Green).
After all, we have outside, contemporaneous support for all of those holes/features being template-based, so we can comfortably work within that construct.
Let’s start with the redan hole, the third.
Richard Francis tells us directly that this is one of the holes that “benefitted” from Hugh Wilson’s overseas visit and that “the location of the hole lent itself to this design”.
You’ll notice he doesn’t say that they found that location while looking for a redan hole. He states that they located the hole first, and only then, working within the possibilities and constraints of their natural conditions, determined that applying some redan principles to that location might work well.
This is wholly consistent with what Francis tells us about the purpose of Wilson’s trip abroad. Francis also tells us clearly that the idea all along was to “incorporate their good features on our course” AFTER Wilson returned in May of 1911.
How could this be? Weren’t the holes already “designed” before Wilson went abroad, as you rightfully ask?
The simple answer is, no, they weren’t designed. Eighteen tees and greens were fitted into the property in a routing, again using the natural features and conditions at their disposal on the property that had been selected as their canvas.
None of these tasks required Wilson to go abroad to study first because all they were using at this point was their own carefully studied knowledge of the property, their understanding of good golf holes in the U.S. through their own individual experiences playing golf at a high level nationally for over a decade, as well as what knowledge Macdonald had imparted regarding agronomics and construction techniques, as well has his knowledge of the great holes abroad that he communicated during their visit with him at NGLA.
All of the early accounts mentioned that what was built at first was incomplete, that there were very few bunkers and pits, and that “mental hazards” and additional strategies would be added later. THAT was the purpose of Wilson’s trip abroad…to see in person the type of great hole strategies they had discussed with Macdonald and now wished to apply to their evolving golf course.
Some months ago, and again as Adam Messix questioned yesterday, we had a great debate here re: whether the 3rd hole was indeed a redan, because it does not have the characteristic green sloping front to back, and tilted severely to the low side. In fact, the 3rd green at Merion slopes back to front, the opposite of what you would expect.
If you think about the definition of the great holes abroad, almost every one of them are self-defined by a few key attributes, and in almost every case it’s not due to some natural feature that needs to be present, but due instead to the placement of artificial hazards which determine strategy. THAT is what makes them somewhat repeatable. Almost every template hole is self-defined by its bunkering pattern which defines the hole strategy…the road hole, the redan, the eden, the short, the alps…
I would contend that when the Merion course was first routed, shaped, and seeded, the 3rd hole was simply a tee in a valley, and a green located on a plateau hilltop, much like probably hundreds of uphill par threes in existence, although that barn-top abrupt rise does make it admittedly a bit special.
If nothing else was done to the hole after that it would still be a very good hole…it could even be bunkerless and would be a very good hole.
Yet, to apply some of what they saw as “redan principles”, the Wilson committee decided to build the key “redan bunker” into the face of the hill diagonally to one side (which Francis tells us was the basement of the barn), and also put some “high side” bunkering in on the left to catch the golfer playing a bit too cautiously away from the visually obvious front-right hazard.
I would contend that those bunkers, and thus the entire hole strategy as a “redan” were added AFTER Wilson’s return from abroad. The green design doesn’t exactly fit the redan concept because as you mentioned, that was already done and in place. But we already know they weren’t looking for exact copies…they were simply looking to implement specific features and principles of great holes abroad and apply them to their natural inland conditions.
So it goes with the other examples. Robert Lesley tells us the “principle” of the Alps Hole they wanted to copy was the large crossing bunker in front of the green, and possibly the large mound behind. Well, we already know that when Wilson returned from his trip abroad and spoke with Findlay, he admitted that to create anything like the original Alps, “it would take a lot of making.”