News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #400 on: October 11, 2010, 12:51:24 PM »
"In this context of buying the land before thinking about a golf course on it...other than just the general adaptability of the land for golf...why would CBM mention the three acres behind the clubhouse when they had hundreds of acres on the other side to choose from?"



Jim:

I think the answer to that can be found in the original committee and meeting minutes of MCC. Essentially HDC and Connell just never mentioned or offered anything other than basically the Johnson Farm to MCC (originally 140 acres), at least not in 1910. In other words, the rest of the acreage (338 with the 117 and 221 without it) that was amassed when HDC made the formal offer of 117 acres to MCC in Nov, 1910 was never considered for golf in 1910.

Apparently that would change in 1912 and 1913 when MCC considered their options for another course (West Course) but by that time we do know that Horatio Gates Lloyd was essentially in control of HDC too.   ;)

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #401 on: October 11, 2010, 01:05:25 PM »
Mike:

The 3 acre P&W land did not include where Merion's driveway is now and regarding traversing the P&W railroad land that was never a problem because the Johnson Farm had a pre-existing easement to that affect which "ran with the land" (legal real estate parlance) and even ran with the app. 60+ year lease of the land to MCC and Merion from the P&W.

Small point but how many of these semi-trivial and minor Merion details am I going to be expected to provide to youse guys?    ;)

At the moment, I'm into another avenue of research and potential discovery which is------what if MCCGA Corporation kept their own records and board meeting minutes separate from MCC? Can you imagine what they may say if found about this important era since this is basically what it (MCCGA Corp) was created for and paid for (Merion East). If they ever existed I wonder what they say in detail about what Wilson and Committee and the likes of CBM and Whigam actually did? Don't forget, MCC was not being assessed or essentially paying for any of the creation of Merion East-----MCCGA Corporation and Lloyd and the Boys were doing all that for them!  ;)

It's sort of amazing to me that no one has put 2 and 2 together and thought of this before. Maybe it didn't work that way but what if it did? And I'm not even going to say where I may start to look for this!  :-X

If you want some good researcher moles get the likes of MacWood et al but if you want the top of the line historical ANALYST with all this you're pretty much gonna need to come to me eventually if you really want to figure it all out someday!  Too bad the likes of MacWood and Moriarty didn't understand that way back when and apparently still don't. ;)
« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 01:09:56 PM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #402 on: October 11, 2010, 01:08:21 PM »
Tom,

They were offered 140 acres - eventually bought 120 from HDC - and the fact that they went outside that 140 to find 3 more is evidence that they had not considered those 3 acres for golf with CBM in June 1910?

The picture Mike showed above, combined with the knowledge that they entered the club off of Golf House Rd, makes it clear that getting onto and off of the property were not the reasons they needed that land.

They clearly didn't mind crossing roads...why would they have decided right away that they didn't want to use any of the 20 acres above Ardmore Ave across from the second green? This would have been preferred by HDC.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #403 on: October 11, 2010, 01:11:25 PM »

Small point but how many of these semi-trivial and minor Merion details am I going to be expected to provide to youse guys?    ;)



All of them...and it's especially helpful when you include your unbiased interpretation of them when you do... :-*

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #404 on: October 11, 2010, 01:17:11 PM »
Sully:

They were not offered 140 acres. They were intially offered 100 acres and through the second half of 1910 apparently Lloyd (representing MCC) and Connell (representing HDC) upped that figure to 117 for actually no increase in total cost----eg ($85,000)!

If one wanted a really good negotiator on his side it seems to me the "go-to" guy was most definitely Horatio Gates Lloyd. As the Dusty Springfield song says, he could obviously make it work "For both sides now!"   ;)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #405 on: October 11, 2010, 01:23:37 PM »
Right...what I meant was that of the 140 HDC owned, MCC had to go outside it to reach a total of 117, all this before they even considered a golf hole...and the fact that HDC would obviously have preferred they use that NW portion across from the eventual 2nd and 3rd holes...amazing!

Was that other 23 acres HDC owned totally unusable for golf?

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #406 on: October 11, 2010, 01:32:51 PM »
"All of them...and it's especially helpful when you include your unbiased interpretation of them when you do... :-*"


Sully:

When one looks at all this dispassionately I'm the one who is actually supplying ALL the facts here and have since the middle of 2008 or at least since Wayne left. You are just one of a number on here who likes to SPECULATE on what they mean but don't exactly or specifically say!   ;)

But if one just looks at ONLY what they actually say, it really doesn't take much interpretation to tell what they actually mean!

The real problem with most all these Merion threads and for some years now, as I mentioned to you on the phone the other day, is at this point, most on here can no longer remember what is actually fact from Merion and MCC itself and what is the highly speculative scenarios and contentions made by Moriarty and MacWood on here that they have tried so hard and for so long to make look like fact but aren't fact.

But I guess that's understandable because I am the only one on this website who has them all and in one place! And, by the way, I have hidden nothing---nothing at all, even if Moriarty and MacWood continue to try to make it look that way because both of them seem to be too damned lazy or whatever to actually go to Merion and MCC to establish a working research relationship with them! Or else they're both too damned embarrassed to admit on here that I have the research material and they don't. Both of those two dudes are about as "research competitive" as one could imagine and that is pretty hard to miss on here given what they've said on here to me and to others.

They even claim I'm trying to block them from access to this material. No WAY! If they want to see it themselves first-hand, they've been told by the club what the process is for all of us but to date they seem to refuse to follow it.

Or maybe they think they deserve some kind of special treatment compared to the rest of us. They don't and they aren't going to get any special treatment either because frankly neither of them deserves it. Actually quite the opposite as they have both conducted themselves despicably on this webite on this subject!!
« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 01:38:58 PM by TEPaul »

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #407 on: October 11, 2010, 01:52:54 PM »
This has probably been covered before, but are there any other courses where M + W gave similar "advice"? If so, is there anything to be learned from that?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #408 on: October 11, 2010, 01:54:48 PM »
Tom,

Your performance hasn't earned you any points either.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #409 on: October 11, 2010, 01:56:51 PM »
Didn't HDC have options on just about everything they eventually bought prior to July 1910? Everything other than the Dallas Estate?

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #410 on: October 11, 2010, 01:59:21 PM »
"Right...what I meant was that of the 140 HDC owned, MCC had to go outside it to reach a total of 117, all this before they even considered a golf hole...and the fact that HDC would obviously have preferred they use that NW portion across from the eventual 2nd and 3rd holes...amazing!"



Jim:

No, the 117 acres was all Johnson Farm land. When they agreed to swap and also buy three additional acres that may've taken it a teeny bit into the Taylor Farm land but only a very small piece of it around the #1 green and Golf House Road. That brought it to 120 acres which was what was purchased by MCCGA Corp. in July 1911, and with the 3 acre P&W land lease that effectively brought it up to 123 acres.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #411 on: October 11, 2010, 02:04:35 PM »
I know...but the 3 acres of railroad land was outside the 140 HDC owned. And they decided on this without considering it for golf and didn't use it to get on or off the property...so why on earth would they buy it? They didn't but an ounce of extra fat anywhere but this little spot just had to be theirs...I'm confused...


Also, didn't HDC have options on everything they eventually bought by the summer of 1910?

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #412 on: October 11, 2010, 02:09:04 PM »
"Didn't HDC have options on just about everything they eventually bought prior to July 1910? Everything other than the Dallas Estate?"


Jim:

By Nov. 1910 HDC had effectively amassed 338.6 acres which included the Dallas estate. Obvioiusly that was when HDC felt comfortable enough to make MCC the initial somewhat formal offer of 117 acres for $85,000 to be settled at some point in December----eg the foregoing to be what is considered in real estate contracts as "the terms" (obviously that (the date of settlement) would somewhat change with the creation of the MCCGA Corporation and Lloyd etc).

By the way, your date there should read July 1911.

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #413 on: October 11, 2010, 02:11:08 PM »
Sully:

On #413 why don't you just call me up. I'm getting sick of typing all this stuff.   :P

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #414 on: October 11, 2010, 02:11:41 PM »
No, 1910.

Didn't HDC have options on the farms adjoining the Johnson Farm (excluding the Dallas Estate) bu July 1 1910?

Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #415 on: October 11, 2010, 02:17:38 PM »
Sean,

I have an article that states Macdonald gave advice to plenty of eastern clubs seeking to build courses, all before NGLA.  

Jim and Tom,

Where do we keep getting this "100 acres" from?   The language in the Site Committee report is that they were offered "100 acres, or whatever would be required to lay out the golf course..      In that same letter, Merion estimated that they would need about 120 acres.

Why would one need to have routed a course to determine that having land on both sides of a lovely creek running through a meadow, or enough land to do anything with on the side in front of the clubhouse was simply a good idea?

I think it's probably a good time to read this report again, and think about it in terms of the overall content and context we now understand better.






And here, once again, is the contents of the aforementioned CBM letter;

New York, June 29, 1910
Horatio G. Lloyd, Esq.
c/o Messrs. Drexel and Co.
Philadelphia, Pa

Dear Mr. Lloyd:

Mr. Whigham and I discussed the various merits of the land you propose buying, and we think it has some very desirable features.  The quarry and the brooks can be made much of.  What it lacks in abrupt mounds can be largely rectified.

We both think that your soil will produce a firm and durable turf through the fair green quickly.  The putting greens of course will need special treatment, as the grasses are much finer.

The most difficult problem you have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage you propose buying.  So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House.  The opinon that a long course is always the best course has been exploded.  A 6000 yd. course can be made really first class, and to my mind it is more desirable than a 6300 or a 6400 yd. course, particularly where the roll of the ball will not be long, because you cannot help with the soil you have on that property having heavy turf.  Of course it would be very fast when the summer baked it well.

The following is my idea of a  6000 yard course:

One 130 yard hole
One 160    "
One 190    "
One 220 yard to 240 yard hole,
One 500 yard hole,
Six 300 to 340 yard holes,
Five 360 to 420    "
Two 440 to 480    "

As regards drainage and treatment of soil, I think it would be wise for your Committee to confer with the Baltusrol Committee.  They had a very difficult drainage problem.  You have a very simple one.  Their drainage opinions will be valuable to you.  Further, I think their soil is very similar to yours, and it might be wise to learn from them the grasses that have proved most satisfactory though the fair green.

In the meantime, it will do no harm to cut a sod or two and send it to Washington for analysis of the natural grasses, those indigenous to the soil.

We enjoyed our trip to Philadelphia very much, and were very pleased to meet your Committee.

With kindest regards to you all, believe me,

Yours very truly,

(signed)  Charles B. Macdonald

In soil analysis have the expert note particularly amount of carbonate of lime.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 02:24:44 PM by MCirba »

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #416 on: October 11, 2010, 02:22:10 PM »
"No, 1910.

Didn't HDC have options on the farms adjoining the Johnson Farm (excluding the Dallas Estate) bu July 1 1910?"



That's a bit hard to tell in July 1910. What is reflected in MCC records is that HDC apparently told them in June 1910 that they had approximately 300 acres (my main computer is down and I can't check that specifically right now) and that MCC could have 100 or whatever they needed to create a golf course (MCC) with a residential community to its west (HDC).

You have to remember that from July 1, 1910 to Nov. 10, 1910 the negotiations involving the land were between Connell and Lloyd and were never reposited with MCC or made part of its records. Those negotiations before the HDC offer was made to MCC on Nov 10, 1910 may be part of Horatio Gates Lloyd's estate papers if such a thing exists today.

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #417 on: October 11, 2010, 02:24:33 PM »
"Sean,
I have an article that states Macdonald gave advice to plenty of eastern clubs seeking to build courses, all before NGLA."



Michael:

Really?? What clubs were they?   

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #418 on: October 11, 2010, 02:33:49 PM »
On July 1, 1910 Lesley says that they had been in negotiations with Connell.


Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #419 on: October 11, 2010, 02:37:40 PM »
Tom,

Please see down the first column about 90% of the way.   This is one Joe Bausch found some time back, and the whole article is really good.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #420 on: October 11, 2010, 02:38:30 PM »
I hate to contribute, but over lunch saw one of the old articles posted here that it turns out I did save on my computer reference.

In the article that details the changes made to avoid road crossings at holes 10-12, it again names Wilson as "one of the original designers". Of more interest is the comment that "The holes just constructed are ones he wished for, but was prevented from building when the course was designed."

Did they consider that land for 11 Green and 12 early in one of their 5 routings and fail to acquire the land then?  Maybe CBM's note about getting more land near the clubhouse was a bit of a deflection to their true intent of getting that land to avoid the road crossing.  Francis made it sound like they only figured out about road crossings later via experience, but this makes it sound like they knew all along that it would be a problem, but just couldn't do anything about it in their original time frame.

Maybe the front nine wasn't as settled in stone as we thought late in the routing process.  If this has been discussed, somehow I have forgotten it or missed it.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #421 on: October 11, 2010, 02:41:53 PM »
Jeff,

Agreed, and here's the article you reference;


TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #422 on: October 11, 2010, 02:43:51 PM »
Jim:

That's right, and between then and the initial formal offer on Nov. 10, 1910 those negotiations would be between Connell and Lloyd. That fact is actually reflected in the initial offer which was by letter from HDC Secretary Nickolson to MCC on Nov 10, 1910.

Why are you so interested in all this minute detail? Is it to try to continue to establish your point that you think Wilson and essentially the members of his committee even though apparently not appointed until January 1911 were out there on the land working on routing and designing a golf course? If so we've been through this before. Maybe they were but there is nothing whatsoever from the Merion or MCC records that indicates that. NOTHING!! At least not anything I've ever seen on here or have ever heard of.

I'm certainly not saying it didn't happen but are you interested in what the actual recorded factual information is or are you interested in speculating about what it didn't say? If so you have a lot in common with Moriarty and MacWood.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #423 on: October 11, 2010, 02:47:52 PM »
Tom,

Are you under the impression that the recorded information paints a thorough and complete picture of what happened and who did what?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #424 on: October 11, 2010, 02:48:30 PM »
MIke,

You "AGREED" with Jeff on something there, I'm curious what you agree with.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back