The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba

 You claim that "surveying the land and creating a contour map were probably the same assignment" and use this as  your excuse for repeatedly having misrepresented Raynor's role?   This despite the fact that I have explained it to you repeatedly and CBM tells us that he hired Raynor for the LATTER because he was so impressed with Raynor's dependability and seriousness in carrying out the FORMER.

But you don't care what CBM wrote. You've got a petty agenda to support so you will just ignore and twist what you don't like.  

In any case, here's the full two pages....it just gets to be a pain to be the only one producing material here.

You selectively and annoyingly post the same crap over and over again, and you have the nerve to claim that you are the only one producing material here?   You are delusional.  Repeatedly posting the same stuff detracts from the conversation, it doesn't add to it. 
________________________________________


As for your last post, while you have been dismissing CBM's book as some sort of inaccurate and idealized fantasy/fiction, while you have been dismissing his book as some sort of inaccurate and idealized fantasy/fiction, we've been telling you for years that it is all set out in CBM's book   Still now you have quit reading and start twisting a bit too early.  All of what you say happened, and THEN, after staking out the land they wanted, including (but not limited to) the land for the Alps, Redan, Cape, Eden, and start and finishing holes, they acquired an option.

We obtained an option on the land in November[sic?], 1906, and took title to the property in the spring of 1907.  Immediately we commenced development.  In many places the land was impoverished.  These had to be top dressed. . . .

[JESII]

Just out of curiosity, is accepted by both sides that the course routing was complete, in basic form prior to step 8 in Mikes last post?

I haven't read enough to see what exactly you guys are arguing about.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

My position couldn't be clearer.
Here it is again.
Your creative/misguided/disengenous reading and interpretation of CBM's own words speak to your motive.
Here's what I stated:

First, it was you that claimed that the staking of the land and the purchase of the land occured simultaneously, when nothing could be further from the truth.

I stated that Raynor surveyed the land after it was staked.

But, let me be even clearer and tell you what happened.
CBM and JW studied the land, found the land upon which to site their ideal holes, routed and staked the land they wanted.
Then, they approached the company with the intent of purchasing the staked land, provided the price was right.
When the company agreed in principle, THEN and ONLY THEN did Raynor survey the land.
He had to survey the land at that point in order to define the boundaries for the purchase.
Once he surveyed the land, CBM purchased the land surveyed..

CBM is clear, he states, JIM WHIGHAM and MYSELF.
He doesn't include Raynor.
In the same paragraph, in the next sentences, he states, "WE", meaning CBM and JW, NOT anyone else.
He continually uses "WE" referencing CBM and JW, and noone else.
Including the passage that "WE" staked out the land we wanted.
That's CBM and JW.  NOT Seth Raynor.

He goes on to say that "WE" found an Alps, .... "WE" found an ideal Redan, "WE" discovered", "WE" found, etc.,etc..
CBM's recollections couldn't be clearer, it was CBM and JW, and NOT ANYONE ELSE.

As to the sale, the company wasn't going to sell some vague plot, they needed to establish, precisely the size of the plot and it's boundaries.  Since it had never been surveyed, ENTER SETH RAYNOR, who surveyed it after it had been staked, for the purposes of defining the perameters of the sale.

Do you think CBM just said, I'll take 205 undefined acres and I'm not sure where the boundaries are ?

That you don't see this, or rather don't want to see this, speaks to your agenda.

The boundaries were rather simple if you examine the land bordered by Peconic Bay, Shinnecock and the Shinnecock Inn property.

You continue to use a shotgun approach, hoping, praying that some newspaper snippet will help you in your goal of undermining CBM's abilty to route a course in short order, NGLA and/or Merion.

You continue to accept seriously flawed newspaper articles as factual, while at the same time rejecting CBM's written words.

I understand your modus operandi, desperate men do desperate things and sadly, you've resorted to desperate, if not dishonest methods and reasoning.

[DMoriarty]

Jim Sullivan,

As I understand the facts, CBM and HJW staked out the land they wanted based on a preliminary routing.  I've been maintaining this for years, and everything that has been brought forward either supports or is consistent with this notion.

As for Mike's position, he has been all over the map on this issue.  His initial position was that CBM and HJW locked themselves into the land before they ever even routed anything.   That is so absurd that he doesnt claim it much anymore, but he still seems to be trying to twist the facts to support some sort of version of that.   In the mean time the direct contradictions and about-faces multiply by the day.  

For example, he has adamantly and repeatedly declared that there is no way they did any real routing or planning while on horseback for those few days, yet he now he seems to want to claim that at the time they optioned the land (December 1906) all they had done was ride the rough property on horseback and from that ride they determined not only the location of the Alps, Redan, Eden, Cape, but that they had also determined the location of the first and last holes and the shape and general dimensions of the property to be obtained. Still more contradictorily, he seems to be claiming that despite all this, that they had not really yet began routing the course or determined even the rough boundary.    

So as far as what Mike thinks at this point, I have no idea.  It just doesn't make sense, probably not even to him.   He is just flailing around trying everything under the sun to try and push his agenda.  When it comes to CBM he has changed his basic position more often than his underwear, and every time has claimed that there was no doubt that he was absolutely correct.   All we know for sure is that whatever Mike comes up with this time it will ultimately be something driven not by the real facts but by the result he wants to reach.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, you wrote that...

"The "London Times" in September 30, 1913, in an article believed to have been written by Charles Darwin, clearly states that NGLA is solely the product of CBM's efforts. "

And...

"He (CBM) tells us in no uncertain terms that Whigham was directly involved in the siting of the holes and routing and staking of the land."

The second statement shows the first is not right.  NGLA was not solely the product of CBM's efforts.  As you said, Whigham was directly involved in siting, routing and staking the course.  He also helped choose the property, and I think he helped find it too.

At the very least, NGLA was the product of a committee of two.  Obviously CBM was the head of the committee. 

Jim, you can't be that obtuse, can you ?

NGLA was SOLELY the Product of CBM's efforts.
Take CBM out of the equation and there's NO NGLA.
NO concept, no study, no land purchase, no golf course.

CBM and CBM alone was responsible for the creation of NGLA.

Much the same as Bandon is SOLELY the PRODUCT of Mike Keiser's efforts,
Atlantic, SOLELY the Product of Lowell Schulman's efforts,
Friar's Head, SOLELY the Product of Ken Bakst's efforts and
Hidden Creek, SOLELY the Product of Roger Hansen's efforts.

Please tell me you understand the contextual reference.

[Mike Cirba]

Just out of curiosity, is accepted by both sides that the course routing was complete, in basic form prior to step 8 in Mikes last post?

I haven't read enough to see what exactly you guys are arguing about.

Jim,

Yes, the course was routed by Step 8 and the final purchase of the land in the spring of 1907, no question about it.

The issue is whether it was routed before Step 6, which was the agreement by the company to accept CBM's offer to secure 205 undetermined acres of the 450 available, and CBM clearly tells us there was no routing at that time.


David and Pat,

Rather than ranting again against me personally, as is your wont when running out of facts,   why don't you just tell us what I've misinterpreted, or how you'd change the following sequence of events (see below) described by CBM in his book?

This isn't about Raynor, who simply did CBM's bidding, although one does need to consider when he might have done his survey and maps prior to construction in the whole timeline.  

Instead, it's about the land aquistion and routing process, and the time it took from inception to purchase, and what it entailed.

Thanks.   Here it is again...this should not be a difficult assignment.

Pllease change it according to your interpretation, but I think this is exactly what CBM wrote.

 1)   CBM tells us about 450 acres of Sebonac Neck that everyone thought was worthless.   It abounded in bogs, swamps, and an entanglement of bushes.
2)   CBM tells us that the 450 acres had never been surveyed.
3)   CBM tells us that the only way that they could get around the property was with ponies.
4)   CBM tells us that he and Jim Whigham “spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground.”
5)   CBM tellus us that he and Whigham determined that it’s what they wanted, provided they can get it reasonably.
6)   CBM tells us that The Company (referred to previously as the Shinnecock Hills and Peconic Bay Realty Co.) agreed to sell him ("us") 205 acres and "we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes".
7)   CBM tells us that, AGAIN (for some undetermined amount of time) he and Whigham studied the contours earnestly, selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes he had in mind.
 CBM tellus us that THEN and ONLY THEN he and Whigham staked out the land they wanted.

[JESII]

So it's the Golf House Road debate all over again...except without the other supposedly fixed boundaries.

Fair enough, just checking. Thanks guys.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Feel free to take a shot at it, as well.   Sanity is in very short supply here. 




1)   CBM tells us about 450 acres of Sebonac Neck that everyone thought was worthless.   It abounded in bogs, swamps, and an entanglement of bushes.
2)   CBM tells us that the 450 acres had never been surveyed.
3)   CBM tells us that the only way that they could get around the property was with ponies.
4)   CBM tells us that he and Jim Whigham “spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground.”
5)   CBM tellus us that he and Whigham determined that it’s what they wanted, provided they can get it reasonably.
6)   CBM tells us that The Company (referred to previously as the Shinnecock Hills and Peconic Bay Realty Co.) agreed to sell him ("us") 205 acres and "we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes".
7)   CBM tells us that, AGAIN (for some undetermined amount of time) he and Whigham studied the contours earnestly, selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes he had in mind.
  CBM tellus us that THEN and ONLY THEN he and Whigham staked out the land they wanted.

[DMoriarty]

So it's the Golf House Road debate all over again...except without the other supposedly fixed boundaries.

Fair enough, just checking. Thanks guys.

You got it.   But it is actually a bit worse than that.  To Mike, this is the Merion discussion.  He wants to try to prove that CBM locked himself into land at NGLA before routing the course so Mike can try to support his foolish claim that they did the same thing at Merion.  And like with the Merion discussion, Mike is willing to distort or leave out whatever it takes to support his rhetoric.  

Mike's latest ploy is typical, especially when viewed in context of this conversation.   As usual, Mike has twisted what he calls the "issue" beyond recognition.  They may well have been still routing the course at the time the company initially agreed that it would sell them the land, BUT MIKE IS MISREPRESENTING THE TIMING THAT THE FORMAL OPTION/PURCHASE AGREEMENT WAS REACHED.  A few weeks ago I provided this chronology taken straight from CBM's book:

A. "Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over [the 450 acres of land], studying the contours of the ground.  

B. "The company agreed to sell us 205 acres [and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes.]"

C.  "Again we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted."

D.  "We obtained an Option on the Land in November 1906."

E.  "[We] took title to the property in the spring of 1907."

Notice that Mike's list is essentially the same, only he drops the last two items, pretending as though his list covers it all when, in his list, CBM mentioned NOTHING about having optioned the property.    

Mike is trying to bury  "D" within "B," so that he can pretend that CBM had already optioned the land before they "again studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted."   But in so doing Mike has again painted himself into a ridiculous corner, where all that had been done prior to mid-December 1906 was that CBM and Whigham had ridden the property a few times.  Mike tries this even though Mike himself has repeatedly claimed that they couldn't have possibly done much of anything during these rides, and even though their are multiple reports of plenty having been done before mid-December 1906.    

So, as you figured, like with the Merion situation Mike is pretending that the option to slightly adjust "exact" boundaries means that there were no boundaries or no routing even considered.  That is as foolish here as it was with the Merion discussion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

What I think Mike misses, intentionally or unintentionally, is the following:

B. "The company agreed to sell us 205 acres [and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes.]"[/b]

That's a critical point.

It tells us that while they had located the site for CBM's ideal 18 holes on their initial inspection of the land, that they decided that was the land they wanted if they could get it, and in negotiating for the 205 acres, the Company gave them some latitude with respect to defining the boundaries, so, they returned to the site, determined the boundaries they wanted, and staked them.

However, since the land had never been surveyed, according to CBM, at that time, it HAD to be surveyed, since the sale, and the deed for the sale would have to clearly define the exact parcel of land sold/bought.  Then and only then was Raynor retained to survey the property that CBM had staked and refined.

That staked and subsequently surveyed land already had the holes sited and the routing determined.
CBM states that clearly.

Mike's sole purpose is to find anything that will discredit CBM's personal account, thus, he relies on flawed newspaper accounts and faulty reasoning toward that end.

No one, in 1906, 2006 or 1806 would sell or buy undefined land.

Boundaries had to be established, and CBM established those boundaries, he staked them out preliminarily, subsequent to siting the holes and routing the golf course.  It's all there in "Scotland's Gift", but, Mike would rather rely on seriously flawed newspaper articles in his attempt to discredit CBM's own account.

When either you or Tom MacWood put forth a premise that CBM might have designed Merion, or at least had a hand in a good number of holes at Merion, I doubted/discounted your premise.

But, when I saw contemporaneous photos of the original 10th hole at Merion, the Alps hole, along with the other CBM template holes at Merion,  I had NO DOUBT that CBM played a larger role than he was previously credited with.

There can be little doubt that he had a significant impact on the design of those holes, if he didn't design them himself.

And, when you consider that the Merion Committee came to NGLA, saw the holes in the ground, saw the sketches and survey maps of those holes, that they were destined to find their way into the design of Merion.

[Mike Cirba]

David/Patrick,

When did I ever say that CBM locked himself into buying specific land before routing the course?   I never said that at all.

In fact, if you look at the eight items above I clearly note both explicitiy and implicitly in both items 7 and 8 that AFTER the company AGREED to sell them 205 acres, these steps describe the routing process which determined the exact boundaries and preceeded the actual purchase that took place months later in spring 1907.

What I said was that this process took a considerable amount of time to accomplish.   Frankly, ALL of the evidence here, including CBM's own account from his book tells us this routing process took MONTHS.

The 2 or 3 days on horseback was not the routing process, although Patrick continues to insist that it was.   Even David would tell you that's lunacy if he were honest about it after a few beers.  

Those two or three days were to determine the suitability of the land, the soil quality, whether there was enough usable land with enough decent contiguous ground of quality and inherent natural interest within the 450 acres to try to secure their mythical "205 acres" within it.  

It's important to remember at this point that virtually every article, as well as the Founders Agreement from 1904, has CBM trying to locate just over 200 acres to accomplish his plans that included one acre building lots for the sixty Founders, so to believe that magically this 205 acres just again popped up because they had already routed the golf course and voila!, it just happened to come out to 205 acres is hogwash.

After that horse ride, CBM tells us they were satisfied that there was enough possibility in the land for his goals.   He NEVER says he routed the golf course at that point.

No, instead he says at that point that the Company AGREED to sell them 205 of the acres, and that the lines of that purchase were UNDETERMINED.    They could locate it over the term of the secure agreement to best serve their purposes for a golf course.

Based on the articles produced on this thread, and knowing the date of the contractual securing of 205 acres (December 14th 1906) and especially David's article from mid-October (if as he argues, it was the Sebonac Neck property being discussed), then we know there was a lot more involved in routing the golf course than 2 or 3 days on horseback.  

In fact, the December articles after the papers for securing 205 "undetermined" acres were signed quote CBM as saying that he and his committee were going to determine which holes to reproduce as well as their yardages over the next several months.

But, we can also safely assume that they had already located good spots for a number of holes at that point, and the articles tell us the same thing CBM's book tells us.   The holes located at the time of the securing of the property included the Alps, the Eden, the Redan, possibly the Sahara, and the Cape.

If CBM had already routed the course during the 2-3 days on horseback, a myth that Patrick seems to have made up out of thin air to suit his CBM God/King dreams and Merion delusions, then why would he have needed to go back and "AGAIN" study the contours EARNESTLY, selecting those that would fit in naturally with the classical golf holes he had in mind...??!

No, instead he secured 205 "undetermined" acres in December, and then purchased the property several months later in sprng of 1907 AFTER studying the contours earnestly and selecting those that would fit in naturally with the classical golf holes he had in mind AFTER which he staked out the property and completed his purchase.


And David, are you saying that an accurate reading of page 187 is that CBM first staked out THE EXACT 205 acres of his purchase BEFORE getting the seller's commitment to sell him 205 acres and securing the property??   And this is after his previous offer for other land from this same seller was rejected?

Why on earth would he ever do that?   Especially when ALL of the reports tell us that the 205 acres CBM secured in December 1906 had undetermined boundaries??

CBM tells us that they first got AGREEMENT from the company to sell them 205 acres and permitted them to locate it as best to serve their purposes.

It was ONLY THEN that they AGAIN studied the contours earnestly, selecting those that would best fit in naturally with the various holes CBM had in mind, AFTER WHICH THEY STAKED OUT THE LAND they wanted.

ALL of that happened AFTER the agreement to secure the land, NOT BEFORE.

Here are the pages again.   You are misreading this if you think the last sentence on page 187, which clearly is meant to start a new idea (giving the timeframes of purchase and start of construction) is a mere sequential follow-on to the complete encapsulated paragraph two above it, that tells us the entire deal.















I think you guys should re-read these passages based on what we've learned here through the articles that have been posted.

While i'm a bit fearful that CBM may come back from the grave to sue me for plagiarism, I think it's more likely that he'll come back to sue the both of you for gross misrepresentation of his book!    

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

I"m off to work, but the quote below sums up Mike's intent.
From the begining his sole agenda was to discredit CBM's ability to route a course in short order.
Here's his quote:

What I said was that this process took a considerable amount of time to accomplish.

The 2 or 3 days on horseback was not the routing process, although Patrick continues to insist that it was.   Even David would tell you that's lunacy if he were honest about it after a few beers.

[/b]

Yet, CBM tells us, in his own words, that in short order, he and JW studied the land LOOKING to site CBM's 18 ideal golf holes, they found the land in short order, a very unique configuration I might add, returned for a quick revisit, confirmed the sites and routing and bought the land.

Had the land not been covered in sticker bushes, instead of 2 or 3 days, CBM and JW probably could have completed the task in 1 day.

I'll be back tonight.

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick (and/or David)

Please show us anywhere in CBM's own words, or in any contemporaneous articles during the years from 1906-1910 that ANY of what you've just written about CBM routing NGLA in short order is evidenced.

It simply is not and not even David would argue that CBM and Whigham routed NGLA in 2-3 days on horseback.

Would you David?

And while you're at it, why not tell us if you agree with Patrick that CBM's direct quotes in all of those December 1906 newspapers were misattributed or not reported accurately when he told us he'd spend the next several months with his committee determining which holes to reproduce as well as the yardages of the holes because I know you don't buy that one either.


Patrick,

You wrote;

From the begining his sole agenda was to discredit CBM's ability to route a course in short order.

Actually, that's where you're most wrong.

If I have an agenda, it's not to show that CBM could not have routed a course in a day's effort like the early British pros before him.

That's an absurd proposition...you or I could route a course in a day if pressed, although the results would almost surely betray our puny efforts.

So you're misunderstanding me, and perhaps that's my fault.

Instead, my agenda has been to show that CBM WOULD not have routed a course in a day's effort like the early British pros before him. That is very much to his credit, and a fundamental reason why NGLA is so monumentally great.


"A first-class course can only be made in time. It must develop. The proper distance between the holes, the shrewd placing of bunkers and other hazards, the perfecting of putting greens, all must be evolved by a process of growth and it requires study and patience." - Charles Blair Macdonald, 1897  

[DMoriarty]

This is a farce.  Cirba has made so many different arguments and taken so many different positions that he has apparently made himself dizzy.   He is essentially arguing against himself in every post, but he doesn't even realize it.    

Mike Cirba.

Where exactly in your timeline does the December 15, 1906, fall?  At what point in your timeline did CBM formally option the property?

You have been arguing that this was your No. 6.    Is this still your position, or have you abandoned this position as well?

And Mike, openly scanning and posting page after page of a copyrighted work is not plagiarism, but it may well be copyright infringement. Classy.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Where you premise fails completely is in the distinct difference between routing a course from scratch and routing a course where you already have each of the holes pre-designed.

Unfortunately, your argument demands that you assign equal efforts to both tasks when one is infinitely easier than the other..

The tasks are substantively different.

Taking pre-designed holes and placing them on the land is infinitely easier, infinitely less time consuming than having to start from scratch with no preconception as to what the holes will be.

My belief is that CBM, SR and CB were able to route courses in short order because a great deal of the creative process had already been done, they already knew the configuration of the holes and merely needed to lay them upon the land.

That's a task that talented architects should be able to do in very short order.

CBM tells us how quickly they found a half a dozen of their holes.
We also know, from the location of the club houses, that four more holes were quickly established.
Thus, with ten holes sited, filling in the rest was a quick exercise.

We've seen, on other courses, how nicely these templates are integrated with the ground.
Yale, Piping Rock, The Creek, St Louis, Sleepy Hollow, Westhampton, CC of Fairfield, Everglades, Mountain Lake, Hackensack, Fishers Island, Essex County, Forsgate, The Knoll, Rock Spring and perhaps even Merion and many others, with diverse topography, easily accomodated CBM's, SR's and CB's templates.

Armed with 18 pre-designed holes, routing them at NGLA wasn't a complicaed matter, it was done in short order.

You can post all of the accounts you want about taking your time to design and fine tune holes.
CBM took years to do that, he studied abroad for years, he had survey maps, sketches, etc., etc.
He knew exactly what he wanted.
He was the first to create holes that were "shelf products" in golf course architecture.
And, at NGLA, in short order he placed his shelf products upon the land.

And, as the record shows, he, SR and CB did it time and time and time again, on totally different topography.

It's not as complex as you're trying to get eveyone to believe.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Good question, and it's hard to say exactly.

Here are the last three again;

6)   CBM tells us that The Company (referred to previously as the Shinnecock Hills and Peconic Bay Realty Co.) agreed to sell him ("us") 205 acres and "we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes".
7)   CBM tells us that, AGAIN (for some undetermined amount of time) he and Whigham studied the contours earnestly, selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes he had in mind.
   CBM tellus us that THEN and ONLY THEN he and Whigham staked out the land they wanted.

Theoretically, number six could have happened as early as those October 15th, 1906 articles you posted.   If the land in those articles was the land of Sebonac Neck, as you've argued, it seems at that fairly early time CBM may have already been looking at the property, and thinking he had agreement to buy "250 acres", as was reported.

However, I'm still not certain that was the land in question, and moreso, those articles telling us the land had already been surveyed, mapped, and those maps having been copied and sent to luminaries abroad certainly confuses the issue.

If accurate, that would mean that Raynor was on the scene much earlier than any of us knew previously, and that the work of looking at that property probably started in late summer, probably with the horse ride.

CBM does tell us in other chapters that his mode of operation was to first have a topo map created, so it's possible David that they were looking at the land well in advance of the securing.

There are a few reasons I think this is unlikely, however.

First, I'm not sure that CBM would go to the expense of having land surveyed and maps drawn without some agreement with the seller to purchase the land.    Second, it would seem a very lengthy time of looking at the property prior to securing the land in December and purchasing it the next spring.

I realize there were 450 acres to wade through to try and determine the scope of their purchase, and that takes some time, but that seems a bit exorbitant, especially as we know that real estate prices on LI were rising and CBM had previously been shut out on a proposed purchase.

So, I think it's more likely that those October articles were a PR ploy by CBM meant as some type of negotiating tool.   I'm not sure what he was hoping to accomplish there, but the articles in entirety and timing don't seem to ring true.

Ditto the November 1 articles I found that said he was down to two choices on Montauk and near Good Ground.

So, I think the most likely scenario is the simplest and most straight-forward.

I think that CBM likely rode with Whigham around the property for 2 or 3 days in October, and determined it was what they wanted in terms of soil and landforms if they could get it for a good price.   They also probably found the Alps hill and redan ridge and the water for the Eden and Cape during those rides.

I think as CBM told us in his book he secured agreement with the company to buy 205 "undetermined" acres in November and the formal papers to that effect were drawn up and signed a few weeks later, on December 14th, 1906.

I think as those December articles point out, the next few months were spent routing the course, deciding which holes to create, which features to copy, getting the survey done and topo maps completed that aided their routing and designing of the course, and once that was completed, they staked the exact holes and dimensions of the property they wanted and signed the purchase papers and began construction.

What do you think?


Patrick,

Actually, I think finding spots for exact replica holes is a tougher and more time-consuminig task than just using natural landforms to create original holes.

By definition, you either need to get really lucky and find a close approximation, or you have to find a landform that will allow you to shape it and build from scratch to get what you need.

Fortunately for CBM, he only actually tried to replicate five holes, four and a half really, and instead created mostly composite and original holes based on what the land gave him to work with at NGLA.

You're right in the sense that he had a fixed starting and ending point with his decision to use the Shinnecock Inn for his clubhouse, and it's logical to assume he'd want some of his course to go down to the beautiful Peconic Bay, but let's not forget that he had at his disposal all of the terrific land of today's Sebonack GC, as well as land on the Shinnecock course where today's holes 4, 5, 8, and thereabouts are located, as that club didn't own that land yet, nor was it part of their golf course at the time.

So, he had a huge canvas to try and narrow down contiguous golf holes, AND he had to make them work in concert with those holes where natural landforms dictated placement of a template hole, such as the Alps/Redan combo.   

This was not a 2 or 3 day job.

At one time CBM thought of creating 18 specific holes, but his thinking changed over the years, such that by the time he built NGLA, there really were only one handful of that type.

I'll provide other accounts of that evolution in his thinking if you want more substantiation.

[DMoriarty]

What do I think?
   I think that, just maybe, it is finally beginning to dawn on you that what you have been doing regarding NGLA for the past several years has been absolutely bogus.  A complete farce.   But that is probably wishful thinking on my part.
   I think that despite your half dozen (minimum) threads, and your tens of dozens of false declarations about what happened, your thousands of posts, and your hundreds of agenda driven pages on the matter, that one of two things are happening.  Either you still have no clue whatsoever, or you are just finally starting to get an inkling that what happened at NGLA is just as it appears in CBM's book and just as has been explained to you repeated and for years now.  
   I also think that if it is the latter you will never be man enough to admit that your agenda has lead you to foolishly and selfishly waste our time for years now, but you will instead pretend as if you have made some monumental discovery and that this is exactly what you have been saying all along.
  That what I honestly think.

Very recently, you were steadfast and certain that the CBM optioned the land as your No. 6.    Finally it seems to have dawned on you just how ridiculous that is.    But rather than admitting you were wrong and facing the consequences you've posted an absurd laundry list that when read carefully says absolutely nothing.  Care to try again?  

As for when I think the land was optioned.  My answer is the same as it has always been, and as appears in CBM's book-- after they had completed the rough routing and chosen the land they wanted.  After your step No. 8.   That is where CBM puts it, and as you used to argue before it didn't serve you, CBM described what happened in chronological order.

Here again is the same old basis outline I have provided numerous times in many different forms over the years.  

A. "Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over [the 450 acres of land], studying the contours of the ground.  

B. "The company agreed to sell us 205 acres [and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes.]"

C.  "Again we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted."

D.  "We obtained an Option on the Land in November 1906."

E.  "[We] took title to the property in the spring of 1907."

[DMoriarty]

CBM's Chapter X, HISTORY OF NATIONAL GOLF LINKS OF AMERICA, provides paragraph by paragraph chronology of searching for, finding, studying, routing, securing, and then developing NGLA.  

1. The first paragraph tied in to to the last chapter, briefly referring to his studies abroad, etc.
2. The next three paragraphs discussed the consideration of three alternate sites and the reasons those sites were not used:  Cape Cod; land between Amagansett and Montauk;  and portion of the Shinnecock property by the canal, well away from SHGC.
3. The next paragraph discussed the Sebonack Neck property and finding the rough outlines of the course on that property:
       A. "Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over [the 450 acres of land], studying the contours of the ground.  
       B. "The company agreed to sell us 205 acres [and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purposes.]"
       C.  "Again we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted."
4. The next paragraph described the specific land they had chosen for their golf course, the land they had staked out, and included some (but not all) of the holes they had found and a general description of the land.
      A.  We found and Alps; we found an ideal Redan; then we discovered a place where we could put an Eden hole which would not permit a topped ball to run up onto the green.  We found a wonderful water hole, now the Cape.  
      B.  We had a little more than a quarter mile of frontage on Peconic Bay, and we skirted Bulls Head Bay for about a mile.  The property was more or less remote, three miles from Southampton, where thoroughfares and railroads would never bother us --a much-desired situation.
      C.  When playing golf you want to be alone with nature.
5. The next paragraph discussed securing the land, dealing with the impoverished topsoil, and the idea behind the original starting point [and finishing point] of the course.
       A.  "We obtained an Option on the Land in November 1906 and took title to the property in the spring of 1907."
       B.   Some of the land was impoverished . . .  they needed 10,000 truckloads of topsoil.
       C.   Didn't have money for immediate clubhouse, so they were planning to put first [and last] hole near Shinnecock Inn, until it burned down.
6. The next paragraph discussed the development and advantages of the clubhouse overlooking Peconic Bay.  Ninth and tenth overlooking Peconic would became last and first hole after clubhouse burned down. This provided unrivaled vistas (other than perhaps at CBM's mid-Ocean.
7. The next four paragraphs described the holes based most directly on particular holes abroad and why those holes were were actually better than those upon which they were based.  (Note that this is not a repeat of the previous discussion of finding a few of these holes.   This is a discussion of the actual holes as built, and how they ended up being superior to the similar holes abroad.  The Cape is not mentioned because it was not based on holes abroad.  The Sahara and Road Hole are discussed because they were.)
      A.  Alps and Redan were the first holes placed, and they both ended up better than the originals, according to Whigham's and Sayers, respectively, and they should know.
      B.   Eden was just built to match the original, only improved by 75 yard carry over water and meadow grass.
      C.   Sahara was described. Rather that being a copy, it was a mental picture embodying [and improving upon] the principle.  
      D.   CBM's Road Hole was built to match original, except for a few changes that CBM thought made it better.
8.  The next paragraph briefly mentions the other holes as either being composite or entirely original, and then CBM discussed adding bunkers and going over the course with Hutchinson in 1910 (after the course was built.)
9.  The next twenty years of tweaking the course are lumped into the next paragraph.
10. The next paragraph brings us up to current, 1927, with CBM only striving to make the bunkers more natural, and not harder but more interesting.  

And that is it for the chronology.  Many of the next chapters are devoted to the opinions, criticisms, and praise of others about NGLA, then an incidental mention of yacht basin, then a few paragraphs on the success of NGLA's mission and legacy, then a tribute and description of the importance of Raynor to CBM, including a brief description of other courses CBM and Raynor, and then Raynor alone, built.

Frankly, I have no idea why this has been so difficult for you, Mike.  As you have argued, it is all in chronological order.   So quit trying to make it something that it is not.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Quote, Mike Cirba,

Actually, I think finding spots for exact replica holes is a tougher and more time-consuminig task than just using natural landforms to create original holes.

Of course you do because it furthers your agenda.
But, in reality, armed with the 18 holes one wants to include in one's golf course, putting them on the land is a simple task, requiring very little time.

The fact of the matter is that CBM could probably have chosen any configuration, and, in 1906, noone would know the difference.
It's only upon retrospective analysis and comparison with other template holes that you judge the quality of the template holes at NGLA.  But, when they were layed upon the land there was no basis for comparison.

CBM knew what holes he wanted incorporated and quickly found his Alps, Redan, Eden, Cape, Sahara, Road, Leven, Bottle, coupled with the 1st, 18th, 9th and 10th.  When you view the border property, Shinnecock hills and the water, along with the starting and finishing points for his two clubhouses, the routing, as Behr declared, completed itself.

Now Behr, who you cited, was there, he played the course in its infancy, and he declared that it routed itself, so how difficult, complex or time consuming could that be ?  Essentially, it was a "drive-by" routing, accomplished in very short order.

All of the leg work had been done previously with CBM's trips abroad, his studies, his play, his survey maps, his sketches, all that preliminary work that might take one a long time, CBM had already completed when he first set foot on NGLA.

So, he knew what he wanted, he had already crafted the individual holes and had only to lay his ideal holes upon a long narrow stretch of land.  It was a turnkey project.
It doesn't get any easier than that.[/b]

By definition, you either need to get really lucky and find a close approximation, or you have to find a landform that will allow you to shape it and build from scratch to get what you need.

What "definition" ?  Oh, you mean your definition.
Nah, he had the holes and he understood their topography, all he had to do was lay them on reasonably resembling land, which he did in short order.  Max Behr declared that the course "routed itself", which confirms what I've stated.[/b]

Fortunately for CBM, he only actually tried to replicate five holes, four and a half really, and instead created mostly composite and original holes based on what the land gave him to work with at NGLA.

That's NOT TRUE and is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

Alps, Eden, Cape, Redan, Sahara, Leven, Bottle, Road were just 8 of the 18 holes he wanted to replicate.
He also wanted to replicate individual holes like Cartgate (# 3) at TOC, the 4th at Sandwich, the 5th at Brancaster, the 9th at Brancaster, the 3rd at Prestwick, the 14th at TOC, the 8th at New St Andrews and others which were combination holes.
So, please don't lie to everyone and insist that CBM only intended to replicate 4.5 holes.
He wanted to try to replicate the 18 holes he deemed his ideal holes.[/b]

You're right in the sense that he had a fixed starting and ending point with his decision to use the Shinnecock Inn for his clubhouse, and it's logical to assume he'd want some of his course to go down to the beautiful Peconic Bay, but let's not forget that he had at his disposal all of the terrific land of today's Sebonack GC

I think you may have made a major mistake in your disengenuous quest to discredit CBM's ability to route a course, especially NGLA.
A mistake equal to the North (Sunrise) highway fiasco your tried to scam us with.
CBM tells us that he found his perfect Eden, and right after it, his Cape.  Which, have the critical element he needs,  WATER.
He also told us that the land he wanted also adjoined Shinnecock.  He goes on to tell us how the land he wanted skirted Bulls Head Bay, then Peconic Bay.

Take a look at Google Earth.  You can't start from the Shinnecock in, play adjacent to Shinnecock hills, down to the WATER for # 13 (Eden), # 14 (Cape), # 17 (Leven), # 2 Sahara, # 3 Alps, # 4 Redan, by going west, further inland, into today's Sebonack golf course.  
It's impossible, and just another one of your wild and desperate, disengenuous attempt to discredit Macdonald's ability to route a golf course in short order.
Quite simply, you can't avail yourself of the land at Sebonack once you've committed to Bulls Head Bay (Eden, Cape, Leven) and, I also believe that some, to a good deal of the land immediately adjacent to NGLA on the Sebonack property might have been the swamps and bogs CBM was refering to, making it undesirable for hole locations.

I maintain that the land between current # 18 and # 1 was always intended as the site for the final clubhouse, thus establishing CBM's 9th and 10th holes.  With each of the individual components:
1 Starting and finishing holes/Shinnecock Inn
2 Course running adjactent to Shinnecock Hills Golf course
3 Use of Bulls Head Bay for his Eden, Cape and Leven
4 Future clubhouse site
5 His 9th and 10th holes.
6 His 11th, 12th and 13th holes, Sahara, Alps and Redan,
7 His 16th and 17th holes, Road and Bottle,

One routing and only one routing could be established.

Even with numbers, 1, 3 and 6, the die is cast.
The course, as Max Behr clearly stated, routed itself.

There was NEVER any consideration to go west, through wetlands onto the Sebonack Property.

Next, you'll tell us that he took an option for Shinnecock and Southampton Golf Courses.

CBM also speaks of the Yacht Basin, and the water frontage of Bullshead bay.
Certainly he couldn't go inland, onto the Sebonack property, away from his Yacht basin.

When you add up all the facts, not your phantom fantasies, it's obvious that the course was located, quickly and easily, as CBM stated, on its current site.[/b]

, as well as land on the Shinnecock course where today's holes 4, 5, 8, and thereabouts are located, as that club didn't own that land yet, nor was it part of their golf course at the time.

But, Mike, that would mean that the course went EAST, away from the Sebonack property, which you just claimed was terrific land, ignoring the wetlands (bogs and swamps) that reside there.  You're so desperate, so confused that you contradict yourself, from one sentence to the next.

The fact is that you're desperate, grasping at straws, grasping at anything that might help you move toward your goal of discrediting CBM's ability to route a golf course that basically routed itself, on the present site.[/b]

So, he had a huge canvas to try and narrow down contiguous golf holes,

NO, HE DID NOT HAVE A HUGE CANVAS.
He had a long, narrow split of land that adjoined Shinnecock Hills, adjacent to Bulls Head Bay, fronting Peconic Bay.
CBM tells us this in his own words, yet, you ignore his written word, prefering instead to direct hiim West, into wetlands and away from Shinnecock, Bulls Head Bay and Peconic Bay.
Your theory on the land at his disposal rivals your North Highway land in terms of absurdity.
But, I'm sure that being wildly incorrect will not deter you and the others helping you, from your goal of discrediting CBM's abilities.[/b]

AND he had to make them work in concert with those holes where natural landforms dictated placement of a template hole, such as the Alps/Redan combo.

Thanks for the admission that your Sebonack property theory is a farce.

If he found the Alps/Redan, along with the Eden/Cape and he played adjoining Shinnecock Hills, Starting and finishing at the Shinnecock in, didn't the course therefore route itself ?
 
Please don't try to dodge that question.

AND, when you add the Bottle hole, The Road Hole, The Sahara, The Leven, VIOLA, the routing is complete, the course has routed itself in short order.[/b]  

This was not a 2 or 3 day job.


YOU'RE RIGHT..... IT WAS A ONE DAY JOB.
The only reason it took 2 or 3 days was because of the sticker bushes on the property.[/b]

At one time CBM thought of creating 18 specific holes, but his thinking changed over the years, such that by the time he built NGLA, there really were only one handful of that type.

NO HE DIDN'T.
THAT'S ANOTHER LIE

Unless you call 15 holes a handful.[/b]

I'll provide other accounts of that evolution in his thinking if you want more substantiation.

You keep thinking that the sheer volume of your erroneous facts and fallacious thinking will somehow convince us to abandon the facts and prudent thought.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

I've demonstrated, with geometric like logic, that each and every one of your wild premises are merely the flawed presentations of a desperate man who will go to any length to discredit CBM.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

I haven't really been following this, but I would like to say that I don't think trying to fit 18 existing templates in a routing is any easier than trying to route a course from scratch.  Nor do I think the time it takes at one routing or site has anything to do with how long it takes to route a course at another site. I have done two projects more or less simultaneously, with similar sites, and one was done quickly and the other took weeks.

I say that from experience, and what is YOUR basis for making a whopper of an assumption that you KNOW how long CBM took?  We do know from one of the articles Mike posted that he anticipated taking five months, even if we don't know how long he actually took.  For that matter, I wonder if that five months has anything to do with the six month time frame between option and purchase?

Given how much of these historic debates have been centered on using actual facts and data, I don't think it right for you to chastise Mike, or determine what his agenda is,  on the basis of your assumptions, regardless of the merits of the rest of his argument.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I haven't really been following this,

Then you really shouldn't comment on the exchanges until you''ve read them all.[/b]

but I would like to say that I don't think trying to fit 18 existing templates in a routing is any easier than trying to route a course from scratch.  Nor do I think the time it takes at one routing or site has anything to do with how long it takes to route a course at another site. I have done two projects more or less simultaneously, with similar sites, and one was done quickly and the other took weeks.

Jeff, you're forgetting that the routing process is only part of the project.
The individual hole designs take a good deal of time and crafting.
But, CBM didn't have to concern himself with that part of the project because he had pre-determined how his individual holes and features had been configured, so that part of the project was done, before he put a spade in the ground.

Like a simple 18 piece jigsaw puzzle, once you have some of the key pieces in place, the others simply fall into place, and that was what happened at NGLA.[/b]

I say that from experience, and what is YOUR basis for making a whopper of an assumption that you KNOW how long CBM took? 

From the combination of what CBM tells us, the configuration of the property, the location of certain features, and rudimentary logic.
Max Behr, no slouch himself, also told us that the routing was simplistic, that the course routed itself.
If I have sited the initial starting and finishing holes, along with the final starting and finishing holes and 8 specialty holes that incorporated site specific features, the linkage of the other holes becomes inherent.

Under the current hole numbers, he had found/sited # 9 and # 10, # 13 and # 14, # 2. # 3, and # 4, # 17, # 18 and # 1, # 7 and # 8, thus establishing the foundation or skeleton of his routing.
So how hard was it to locate/route # 5 and # 6, # 11, and # 12, # 15 and # 16 ?
The above six holes were simple connectors. 
Again, Max Behr, who was there at the begining, has stated that the routing was a self evident project, a self completing project.
Are we to take his word, or Mike Cirba's word ?[/b]

We do know from one of the articles Mike posted that he anticipated taking five months, even if we don't know how long he actually took.  For that matter, I wonder if that five months has anything to do with the six month time frame between option and purchase?

Is it your position that CBM staked out a parcel of land with no idea as to the template hole locations and routing ?
[/b]

Given how much of these historic debates have been centered on using actual facts and data, I don't think it right for you to chastise Mike, or determine what his agenda is,  on the basis of your assumptions, regardless of the merits of the rest of his argument.


Well Jeff, let me be clear.  Mike has deliberately misreprensented the facts, he's omitted relevant facts and he's drawn faulty conclussions. 
You're apparently uninformed as to what's driving him to do this. 
He's got an agenda, with a pre-determined goal, which skews his presentation, since it, his presentation can never be objective.

Should I have praised him or chastized him ?

If you don't want to praise or chastize Mike, that's your business, but don't tell me how to respond to his posts, especially if you haven't read all of the posts.

Thanks

[DMoriarty]

Jeff Brauer,

Your post is misleading, at best.

There is no article stating that routing the course would take five months.  The December 15, 1906 article from the NY Sun stated that the committee to lay out the course would have five months (until spring) to plan the holes "in detail" and create a topographical model of the the course in miniature to guide the workmen who would begin in the spring.  The same article included a description of exact land to to be used and of a number of the golf holes.   While the detailed planning was not yet complete, the land for the course had already been chosen and the general routing in place.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Mike didn't label the date of the last article he posted, although I know it has been posted before. I presume we are both talking about the same article, but if not, I apologize. 

If so, I certainly take the phrase "distances and the best holes we can concieve" to include routing. If figuring out what distance holes go where isn't routing, then what is?  And given that they apparently haven't decided at that point what holes to reproduce, and those templates and concepts are closely tied to the land, especially the Alps and a few others, I think he is referring to routing after taking the option in November, and then finalizing the deal the next spring after knowing where the holes would go.

If I am not mistaken, that would be your position, that he only finalized the deal after knowing the final routing in a fair amount of detail.

I still disagree with Pat that routing of this type could be done in a day or two.  Or to be more precise, I believe it was unlikely, but not impossible.  As Mike says, if a guy is going out of his way to build a world class course, I just cannot see him taking it that lightly and not examining every possibility.

And, I seriously doubt there is a uncontested parallel between any two golf courses, much less NGLA and MCC, but can't really know who is arguing about what in this case.......every course is unique in how it comes togther.  If that is Mike's agenda, I agree its sort of obtuse, but I don't see anything other than from you two saying it is.  Of course, I am not included in every back room, off line series of emails on golfclubatlas.com, so I must be out of the loop, and gladly so!

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,

You dont know what you are talking about.  Why do you butt into these things without even bothering to read the articles?   Research matters. Details matter.  Your opinion means nothing unless you actually know the facts.  

And you have no idea what my position is or isn't.   Yet you hop into these threads and spout off regardless.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

CBM had already determined the distances for his ideal holes.
He lists them, along with a summary of his ideal holes.

The notion that CBM bought land and then embarked upon the routing and individual hole design is contrary to what CBM wrote.

He stated, chronologically, that they found the holes first, then staked the land that would accomodate them.

That's pretty clear.

As to "fine tuning" CBM never stopped "fine tuning" NGLA as long as he retained any degree of influence at NGLA, which was for decades.

I fear that you've looked at a few fraames, rather than having watched the entire movie.(;