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.


Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2325 on: June 06, 2011, 05:14:19 PM »
David,

Tillinghast did NOT see the course between the time the plans were approved at the start of construction until he played it shortly after it was finished.

But, he LIVED in Philadelphia.   Are you telling us that during the winter months and GAP meetings that he had no discussions with his closest friends like Rodman Griscom and/or Robert Lesley??   Are you losing it??

Mike,

Surely you see the double standard you adhere to.

Now, you're insisting that AWT, who wasn't officially connected with Merion or the Committee, spoke to them, but, CBM who was officially retained by Merion, never spoke to them by phone.

You can't have it both ways.


Tillinghast told us precisely what everyone else did...that CBM advised the Committee...big whup!!  

But, he also told us that Hugh Wilson and Committee were the ARCHITECTS of the golf course, and whatever advise and suggestions that CBM provided Tillinghast didn't think they warranted mention in an extensive review of the entire golf course for American Cricketer.   Do I need to re-post the entire article again??

You keep using words like "chosen".

CBM had absolutely no such authority, I'm sorry to say.   If he did, the Merion Committee wouldn't have had to present their proposal to the Merion Board of Governors on April 19th 1911 for ACTUAL approval.

Instead, it's very clear that without such authority, the meaning of the word is the first one, not the second, because CBM had no ability to function within the second definition.

ap·prove  (-prv)
v. ap·proved, ap·prov·ing, ap·proves
v.tr.
1. To consider right or good; think or speak favorably of.
2. To consent to officially or formally; confirm or sanction: The Senate approved the treaty.
3. Obsolete To prove or attest.
v.intr.
To show, feel, or express approval: didn't approve of the decision.


As far as Findlay, once again you're talking out of your blow hole.

You have absolutely no idea when Alex Findlay was there, how many times, who he met with, over what period, or anything other than what we all know...he was there at least TWICE, just like good Old Macdonald! 

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2326 on: June 06, 2011, 05:15:01 PM »
Mike & Jeff,

Would you please list your attribution percentage.

Thanks

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2327 on: June 06, 2011, 05:17:18 PM »
By the way, if Tilly said the CBM was the architect of Merion, I'd believe him.

He saw the plans, he spoke with CBM and Merion, and he still credited ONLY Wilson and his Committtee.

And, he wasnt fooled by the terminology as his good friend George Crump's design team was named the exact same thing at Pine Valley...the Construction CoMmittee.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2328 on: June 06, 2011, 05:32:39 PM »
Whigham said it, and unlike AWT, Whigham was there.  Yet you don't believe him.

Given Colt's input, I am not sure Pine Valley is the best example for you.
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2329 on: June 07, 2011, 12:11:13 AM »
Mike & Jeff,

Could you please quantify the relative contributions to the routing and design of Merion.  (committee % vs CBM %)

List as a percentile (and the inverse) that which you attribute to the committee and that which you attribute to CBM and HJW.

It's a rather simple task and given your ardent support for Wilson and his committee, should be a simple, quick reply.

Thanks

Jim Nugent

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2330 on: June 07, 2011, 01:23:52 AM »
Whigham said it, and unlike AWT, Whigham was there.  Yet you don't believe him.


Whigham also called Merion a CBM/Raynor course.  Unless you believe Raynor also worked on Merion, the eulogy is already wrong. 

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2331 on: June 07, 2011, 01:42:24 AM »
It appears Findlay considered 17 a par 3 in 1912
"We finally beat Medicare. "

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2332 on: June 07, 2011, 01:50:09 AM »
Whigham said it, and unlike AWT, Whigham was there.  Yet you don't believe him.


Whigham also called Merion a CBM/Raynor course.  Unless you believe Raynor also worked on Merion, the eulogy is already wrong.  

This is typical of the kind of twisted approach to interpretation prevailing on one side of the discussion. Ignore the interpretation that makes sense, and go with the interpretation that renders the article nonsensical.  That way you can both make your point and portray Whigham as a fool, thus reinforcing your point.  Whatever it takes to reach the desired result.
_________________________________

John Collum,  

Yep.
________________________________

Alex Findlay, after spending an hour on the links with Wilson in 1912:

Wilson "is now convinced that [Merion's Alps] will take a lot of making to equal that famous old spot.  But many of the others, as laid out by Charles B. Macdonald, are really great."

So what exactly is there to argue about?
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 01:59:35 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Jim Nugent

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2333 on: June 07, 2011, 02:52:54 AM »
Whigham said it, and unlike AWT, Whigham was there.  Yet you don't believe him.


Whigham also called Merion a CBM/Raynor course.  Unless you believe Raynor also worked on Merion, the eulogy is already wrong.  

This is typical of the kind of twisted approach to interpretation prevailing on one side of the discussion. Ignore the interpretation that makes sense, and go with the interpretation that renders the article nonsensical.  That way you can both make your point and portray Whigham as a fool, thus reinforcing your point.  Whatever it takes to reach the desired result.


So I take it you don't believe Raynor worked on Merion.  Just what is the interpretation "that makes sense?" 

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2334 on: June 07, 2011, 04:10:47 AM »

Can one of you sort of circle the green in this picture.  I can't make anything out of it, yet both of you seem to see something different there.

Also in the Lesley quote, what do you make of the supposed 100 foot precipice that needs to be guarded by an iron railing to prevent golfers from falling into the depths.  Isn't the depth of the quarry more like 25 or 30 feet?

Standing upon a precipice 100 feet in the air with iron railings to prevent the far-swinging player from falling into the depths of the quarry beneath, the golfer finds himself facing the seventeenth green some 220 yards away.  Over the quarry, over an intervening hill, over an intervening valley the ball flies to the big seventeenth green, where two putts make the par three.




Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2335 on: June 07, 2011, 06:13:16 AM »

Whigham also called Merion a CBM/Raynor course.  Unless you believe Raynor also worked on Merion, the eulogy is already wrong.  

Give me a break. That is like someone calling an Alison course, like Burning Tree or Knollwood, a Colt & Alison course. Everyone knows they worked as a team for years although they did not collaborate on every design.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2336 on: June 07, 2011, 06:50:50 AM »




Mike
Is that a Principal's Nose in the middle of the 5th fairway?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2337 on: June 07, 2011, 08:16:19 AM »
Byran,

The only thing I could think of was maybe he was talking about 100' ASL, or exaggerating to add drama.

Mike & Jeff,

Why are you suddenly silent and afraid to quantify your long standing position, one you've argued for during this entire thread ?

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2338 on: June 07, 2011, 08:49:28 AM »
Patrick,

Of all the ridiculous questions you've asked here, this one might be the topper.

If you can show me proof that CBM designed one hole, one feature, or was responsible for the position of one blade of grass on the original Merion course I might start deducting points from the man in charge, Hugh Wilson, who with his Committee were responsible for 100% of the Merion Golf course that opened in 1912.

I await your vain attempts to prove otherwise.  ;)  ;D

Tom MacWood,

It might be a "Principal's Nose"....haven't you been following along?

Although I think David called it a "Hell bunker" feature previously, so who really knows??   We can play this game all day and just make it up as we go along.

Didn't you see where Tillinghast wrote that Merion planned to add sorts of "experimental" touches to the golf course in years to come after it opened in 1912?   Here it is again for you;



Of course they wanted to try to add some features and such from holes he'd seen abroad...that's clear.

And as romantic, quaint, nostalgic, and familiar as those type of features may make us feel today when we see them on vintage courses, I think the record at Merion is also clear that pretty quickly Hugh Wilson and William Flynn realized that adding such unnatural touches as "Mid-Surrey Mounding" really didn't add much and were sort of ungainly truth be told and they were better off just going with what the natural features of the land dictated.

Certainly holes like the original Alps, interesting as they might be to us geeks, were really blights on the landscape in that environment.


All,

Not since Marc Antony gave Julius Caesar post-mortem oral have we seen such an over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic eulogy as what HJ Whigham delivered to his late Father-in-law, where he essentially credited him with every good course built in America from 1910 to 1939.   More on that later...
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 08:53:16 AM by MCirba »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2339 on: June 07, 2011, 09:03:42 AM »
Mike,

Thanks,

 so your position is Wilson and committee 100 %, CBM & HJW 0 %.

Interesting that you give CBM absolutely no credit for the routing and design of Merion.

If I'm not. Mistaken, this was the reason that David crafted his opinion piece.

So, it's your contention that CBM' visits, correspondence, phone calls and supplied sketches along with the committees two day visit to NGLA had  no influence, no impact on the routing and design of Merion.

By the way, Your continued attempts  to force your opinion on others is falling on deaf ears

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2340 on: June 07, 2011, 09:14:36 AM »
Patrick,

"Advice and suggestions" does not equate to responsibility and attribution.

Still waiting on your evidence and proof otherwise.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2341 on: June 07, 2011, 09:38:54 AM »

Didn't you see where Tillinghast wrote that Merion planned to add sorts of "experimental" touches to the golf course in years to come after it opened in 1912?   Here it is again for you;


Where have you been? I've always maintained Wilson's design influence began after he returned from the UK.

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2342 on: June 07, 2011, 10:03:45 AM »
Tom,

You have absolutely no idea when Wilson's interest in architecture began, do you?

Reports tell us he also visited all of the best courses in the US as well, prior to the development of Merion East.

You have no idea when that activity took place, do you?

Such blanket statements without a hint of supporting evidence is the heart of the problem here.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2343 on: June 07, 2011, 11:00:06 AM »
Patrick,

Sometimes real life intervenes.  But, this is an interesting excersize and here goes:

Routing (by days) - CBM 4 days max.  Committtee from Feb 6-April 6 (presuming time to get topos in January) 60 days.

 Merion Committee 93%-CBM 7%

Routing (by hours)- Merion Committee twice a week for 8 weeks, 4 hours per night, 64 hours x 2 (Assumes Wilson equaled all other committee input)  for 132 hour.  CBM - again 32 hours max, although we know some time was devoted at NGLA to teaching hole designs, if not all.  Give him 20 hours. 

 Merion Committee 87%-CBM 13%

Routing by Plans -  Merion Committee- Many before NGLA visit, 5 After.  CBM - None known, but give him come credit.


 Merion Committee 95%-CBM 5%

Routing by Holes Figured Out -  Merion Committee- From Francis, at least the last 5.  Give  CBM credit for the short 13th based on the June 1910 visit, and maybe seeing first that the Dallas Estate was necessary, so by Extension the Road Hole3.  Of the known holes figured out, its a 5:2 ratio.  It could be a 16:2 ratio given CBM did no known plans, but we will give him credit for the same ratio throughout the course.

 Merion Committee 73%-CBM 28%


By Approvals - Both Lloyd and CBM approved the final routing(Lloyd from the sense that the swap and extra land was okay.  We really don't know how finalized the land swap plan was by the time CBM showed up for his scheduled April 6 meeting, but we'll split the difference.

 Merion Committee 50%-CBM 50%

Giving each category equal weight, it appears the ratio overall is for the routing plan is  Merion Committee 77.5%,  CBM - 22.5%, giving CBM every benefit of the doubt, even when not fully supported by the record.

As to features, even allowing for the Principle's nose TMac just points out, giving Merion 7 Templates, I will go with Merion 62% and CBM 38%.  If routing and features are weighted equally, then it's about Merion 75% overall and CBM 25% overall.

Just my best attempt at a very speculuative matter, but a fun excersize.  Hope I don't get called a lying, disingenous sleaze for trying to answer your question in an intelligent way.



Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2344 on: June 07, 2011, 11:32:10 AM »
Byran,

The only thing I could think of was maybe he was talking about 100' ASL, or exaggerating to add drama.

...........................


Patrick, I'd go with the "exaggerating to add drama".  Surely Lesley knew better. But, that's the trouble with so many of the contemporaneous reports and remembrances, many seem to have exaggerations or misstatements.  How do we know what is true and accurate and what is not?

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2345 on: June 07, 2011, 11:54:22 AM »
Jeff,

Disingenuous and liar are redundant.  So, let's just call you a disingenuous sleazy dog for this piece of new math on the attribution.   ;D ;)  (Just kidding, if case you don't get the emoticons).  You forgot to add the statistical caveat that your analysis is only accurate 19 times in 20, although in this case more like 10 times in 20.  As you note several times, we don't know much directly about who did the routing and design of the holes, so it is really a shot in the dark.


Patrick,

I assume you are trying to put a numerical value on this so that we could see how far apart the two warring sides are on the attribution.  I'm not sure of the efficacy of this approach.  I think they are closer than they'll ever admit.

Just to add my 2 cents to the new math exercise, I'll go with the Pareto Principle - Merion Committee 80%;  CBM/HJW 20%. 

I assume that you will add your own guesstimate and that you expect David and Tom M to also weigh in.


Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2346 on: June 07, 2011, 12:08:20 PM »
Jeff,

I think your approach, vis a vis, compartmentalization and summary is reasonable.

As to being called a lying, disingenuous sleaze, I think we can eliminate the redundancies in their entirety, and just stick with "sleaze" ;D

Bryan,

I was trying to distill the rhetoric down to a numeric expression, which as you pointed out would quantify the differential in opinions.

Mike's numeric attribution is at odds with his earlier rhetoric, so, until he matches up and consolidates the disparity in the two, we'll have to place his numeric assessment on the sidelines.

I'd prefer to hold off on my opinion until after David, Tom and others, including the Merionettes, if they're so disposed, provide theirs.
Since Mike is so good at "channeling" the Merionettes, it shouldn't be too difficult to have them provide a simple number.
With the voluminous amount of lengthy emails, a one, two or three digit number shouldn't be difficult to type or "channell" ;D

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2347 on: June 07, 2011, 12:25:01 PM »
Patrick,

CBM had a lot of advice and also a working design committee at NGLA that included Dev Emmet, Walter Travis, and HJ Whigham, and we know he also said he took a lot of advice from Horace Hutchinson and others, particularly on green design which he sites in his book.

How would you proportion design attribution of NGLA among the participants and why?

I believe you earlier told us that you gave FULL attribution to CBM because he was the guy responsible...the guy who took the advice of others, considered it, distilled it against alternatives, and made the decisions.

Isn't that what Max Behr told us that Hugh Wilson did at Merion?

Until you can show us proof of CBM and/or Whigham designing a blade of grass at Merion, I have to stick with 100% attribution to Hugh Wilson and his Committee for the design and 100% to Hugh Wilson as the man in charge and chief decision-maker.

Seems wholly consistent with your benevolent dictator philosophy, no?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2348 on: June 07, 2011, 12:25:37 PM »
Patrick,

Of all the ridiculous questions you've asked here, this one might be the topper.

I think it's one of the most intelligent questions asked on this thread.


If you can show me proof that CBM designed one hole, one feature, or was responsible for the position of one blade of grass on the original Merion course I might start deducting points from the man in charge, Hugh Wilson, who with his Committee were responsible for 100% of the Merion Golf course that opened in 1912.

If you can show us proof that Wilson designed one hole, one feature, on the original Merion course I'll do the same.

Your 100 % is at odds with your previously admitted position regarding CBM's role at Merion.


I await your vain attempts to prove otherwise.  ;)  ;D

Tom MacWood,

It might be a "Principal's Nose"....haven't you been following along?

Although I think David called it a "Hell bunker" feature previously, so who really knows??   We can play this game all day and just make it up as we go along.

Didn't you see where Tillinghast wrote that Merion planned to add sorts of "experimental" touches to the golf course in years to come after it opened in 1912?  

Mike, I could be wrong, but, I don't think this debate has anything to do with what happened at Merion after 1912


Certainly holes like the original Alps, interesting as they might be to us geeks, were really blights on the landscape in that environment.


All,

Not since Marc Antony gave Julius Caesar post-mortem oral have we seen such an over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic eulogy as what HJ Whigham delivered to his late Father-in-law, where he essentially credited him with every good course built in America from 1910 to 1939.   More on that later...

Me thinks that Cirba doth protest too much


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #2349 on: June 07, 2011, 12:40:35 PM »
One of the most frustrating yet telling of Mike's characteristics is his near complete lack of self-awareness in a his posts. He has no sense of irony, proportion, or self-reflection whatsoever.   He will write and say anything if he thinks it might sell, no matter how hyperbolic, exaggerated, and misleading it might be.  

Take his treatment of the Whigham remembrance.  He his trying to convince us to disregard Whigham's inclusion of Merion on the list of famous courses by CBM and/or Raynor by falsely portraying the entire article as an "over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic eulogy" where Whigham "essentially credited [CBM] with every good course built in America from 1910 to 1939." Apparently Mike's point is that we ought to discount  "over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic" statements and their authors as overly emotional, too attached to the subject matter, inherently unreliable, and unworthy of any real consideration.  I am all for this generally, but Mike ironically focuses on  the wrong author.

Here is what mike wrote, his bold:
"All, Not since Marc Antony gave Julius Caesar post-mortem oral have we seen such an over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic eulogy as what HJ Whigham delivered to his late Father-in-law, where he essentially credited him with every good course built in America from 1910 to 1939.   More on that later...

The irony is that Mike's representation suffers from the exact same defects which Mike falsely attributes to the Whigham article.  The Whigham articleis pretty damn  reasonable given the context.  Mike's claim is the only thing "over-the-top, over-reaching, [and] hyperbolic."    Whigham did not credit CBM with designing every good course in America. He credited CBM and NGLA for laying the groundwork for the golden age courses that followed.  He essentially highlighted the groundbreaking and conversation changing nature of CBM's work at NGLA, and that, in my opinion, is a reasonably accurate claim, especially within the context written.  

In fact, Whigham not only specifically discussed other great courses for which CBM was not responsible, he demonstrated, unequivocally, that he knew the difference between a CBM course and a course at which CBM had merely offered advice, only some of which was followed.  Pine Valley.  According to Whigham, CBM inspected the land at Pine Valley and offered his opinion on what should be done, but only some of that advice was followed.   Whigham readily acknowledged that while considered one of the best three courses in America, Pine Valley was NOT a CBM course, but sprang from the mind and ideas of Crump.  But Merion was a CBM course.  Whigham was there and he knew firsthand that this was the case.

So the "over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic" statements?  All Mike's.  Same for the outright false and/or blatantly exaggerated and misleading statements.   Mike's claim(s) deserve the same treatment he suggests for Whigham.   He should be dismissed as a partisan hack who is way too caught up in the emotion of the situation and who cannot help misrepresenting the truth to make his case.   The constant "over-the-top, over-reaching, hyperbolic" crap is ample evidence that he deserves no place in this conversation.
____________________________________________________________________

Jeff Brauer,

Instead of trying to mock me for calling out Mike for his less than productive  tactics, wouldnt it be more productive if you would join me?   Use kinder words if you like, but surely you can see what he is doing here.  You have admitted it before.   Take a look at any point above where I call him out, and tell me that the substance of my criticism is misplaced.  So scold me for my word choice all you like, but don't go on ignoring the obvious.   I'll bet I'd be a lot less harsh and a lot less negative if others like you didnt turn a blind eye to what we all know is ongoing here.
____________________________________________________________________________________

Bryan,    

The photo you posted was apparently taken with a wide angle.  The green is the light colored patch in the back center of the photo close to the center trees, much further away than one might expect to find had it been taken with a narrower  lens.   While it is difficult to make out much, one can just make out the front ridge of the plateau green.    I may have a better copy of the photo somewhere, or when I get a chance I will try to make a better copy from an actual magazine from which it came.

The 100 ft. drop figure gets thrown around elsewhere as well.   Merion was none to good at accurate measurements.  At least they didn't pretend there was an Ocean crashing  below like the chasm hole at Biarritz.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 12:48:00 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)