[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

In the early part of the last post, there is much to agree on, but our understanding is much different in some areas.:

that CBM wrote about both the price (providing we can obtain it reasonably) and what parcels to get (we were permitted to use it to best serve our purposes)  When he writes specifically about both, how can you interpret it as only cost? [color=green[

Because the events occured sequentially, not simultaneously.
One followed the other.
The agreement to sell at a reasonable prices was the first and primary concern.
Without a sale at a reasonable price, nothing occurs.[/color
 
But, basically we agree they first rode the property to see if was suitable for golf at all, for if it wasn't, then price wouldn't matter much, would it?  Then they negotiated a favorable/acceptable price.  Then they spent an undetermined amount of time studying it earnestly to site the holes. 
No problems so far, other than me thinking he wouldn’t have spent a lot of time routing on land he wasn’t sure he was going to buy yet, and you moving the staking process way up in the order of things and generally gasbagging on and on about a point we agree on as if we don’t.


I didn't move the staking process up, I quoted Macdonald directly.  You're the one gasbagging on this issue.[/b]

We start to disagree on the option.  My understanding is that you take an option on land specifically in order to secure your rights while seeking to determine if it can meet your needs (or be zoned, permitted, or in this case, fit 18 holes to your liking, etc.)  An option would be the perfect vehicle for CBM to buy time to study the property. It would also stop potential rivals (other developers or maybe even Shinny itself to stop his project) from buying the property out from under him while he made his studies. 

Please, that's a riduculous interpretation and premise, put forth to justify your position.
There was no zoning so why introduce that element ?
Rivals ?   Macdonald states that the land was little known, never surveyed and worthless, so why are you introducing these absurd elements, if not for the sole purpose of support your flawed premise ?

On a 450 acre waterfront property, you don't grant someone carte blanche, undefined options, especially if those options could compromise your ability to develop the remaining parcel of 245 acres.  If the company granted an open ended option, CBM could have blocked off the remaining 245 acres making it inaccessible, uncapable of future development and worthless.  Does that sound like a prudent business decision ?

No one, repeat no one grants an option on an undefined parcel of land that is part of a larger parcel of land that can be used for future development.

Remember, the same company thought that the 120 parcel was more valueable than $ 200/acre, so they apparently understood real estate values and development potential.[/b]
 
I agree that the realty company still had to agree to the parcel created, but that could easily be written in as a condition to the option. 

How could you write that in if the boundaries of the option hadn't been established ?
Please, start thinking rationally.[/b]

If you look at many standardized option forms, there are spaces for such conditions, so your example is extreme and probably wouldn’t happen among reasonable men who wanted to make a deal.

You can look at all of the 2011 standardized option forms you want.
Unless you define the land, you can't option it.
And, in 1906, my money says that one's word and a handshake, especially from CBM, and especially knowing who his backers were, was sufficient.[/b]

And, how would CBM make a golf course work on our checkerboard example anyway? 


It's not a checkerboard, it's a linear excercise, akin to a chain, where each link represents a hole, that goes out, then loops back in to the starting point.  Just because you can't visualize it, doesn't mean that others couldn't.[/b]

As you must know, conditional land sales are quite common, and CBM told us in his words that the realty company did agree to let him configure it. 
Do you really think that the company would let him configure his course such that the company's remaining 245 acres was landlocked, inaccessible, and therefore incapable of being developed, thereby turning an asset worth $ 49,000 into $ 0 ?
Your either obtuse or have become almost as agenda driven as Mike.(;[/b]

On one hand you say you CBM is telling us what we need to know, and on the other, you are substituting your wild theoretical situations as “proof” that the realty company wouldn’t allow CBM to configure the land. 

That's not true, my premise isn't wild, it's the reflection of prudent business practices.
You would have us believe that the realty company was going to commit financial suicide by letting CBM site his parcel anyway he saw fit, irrespective of the damage it might do to the remaining 245 acres.  That wasn't going to happen.  No prudent businessman would paint themselves into that corner.  You know it and I know it, yet you continue with your charade.
You're starting to sound desperate.[/b]

Patrick, the mere existence of NGLA in its current configuration is proof enough that CBM was able to configure the land and your argument is a complete red herring.

That's one of the dumbest statements that I've seen posted on this site, from anyone, let alone an architect.
How you draw the connection that the existance of NGLA is proof that my argument is a red herring is quite a leap, absent a modicum of logic.[/b]  

I agree that there may have been some kind of interim agreement before the option, but it would reduce its need to CBM. 

OK, I'm starting to make progress with you.
I don't see how there's any reduction in need inurring to CBM.[/b]
 
Why have two legal documents (one, so far never mentioned) when one would do it? 

Why do you make the assumption that there was a legal document on the price ?
Wouldn't a handshake suffice ?  A Macdonald handshake, considering those backing this project ?
I think CBM went back to the company and said, "I'd like to buy some land on Sebonack Neck if you'll sell it to me for $ 200/acre.
Knowing the land, I think they said, $ 200/acre sounds reasonable, how much do you want to buy and where is it located.
Then, I think he said, let me study it a little more and I'll get back to you.
Enter the second visit where he locates his holes, stakes his boundaries, has Seth Raynor Survey the land, and then enters into a legal option on that parcel.[/b]

We can conjecture that it might be to make sure his subscriptions all came back in or to gain other concessions from the company (i.e, building of the Shinnecock Inn to save him clubhouse monies) Yes, that is possible, maybe even likely.

I disagree with your contentions about the housing.  If land cost was an issue, and no housing was contemplated, why did CBM offer to buy 205 acres, when he offered only on 120 acres on the canal site? 

Because that's the amount of land he needed for that specific site, a site which was almost on the North Highway to the South, bordering Shinnecock Hills to the East, Bulls Head Bay to the East and Peconic Bay to the North.

As to the canal site, he felt he only needed 120 for his golf course.

If you'll go back and look at David Moriarty's and Bryan's measurements of the property you'll see that he needed almost all of the 205 acres, especially given the topography.   Are you sure that you've read this entire thread ?[/b]

When he later told Merion that 120 acres was all that was necessary for golf? What do you suppose the reason for offering on 205 acres was?  And, given we are told by David Moriarity that contemporaneous articles that quote participants are the gold standard of historic documentation, why do you insist that CBM saying in that article (or giving that info to the reporter first hand) is inaccurate?  As of December 1906, housing was in the Sebonak plan, but we agree it was taken out later, for reasons unknown.

Jeff, that you of all people don't understand site specifics is quite shocking.
If he told Merion that 120 acres was all that was necessary for golf, perhaps, at Merion, that was true.
But, it wasn't true at NGLA.
As to housing being in the 1906 Sebonack plan, could you tell me what page in "Scotland's Gift" that appears on ?[/b]

You again spend much time telling me I have the order of things mixed up when I have done no such thing. 
I understand that he routed the course and then staked the ground (meaning boundaries to set the final land purchase. 

That's a surprise.
It seems like you've been contesting that position, a position I've advocated all along.
I'm glad to know that you finally agree with me.[/b]

To me, the ONLY issue is whether it happened largely before November or after. 
And, as stated, I doubt it has made one iota difference to the final product! So, I guess I don’t even really care that much.

When CBM chronicles the chain of events, and he places the reference to the obtaining of an option after the process of routing and staking the golf course, I think you have to agree that the option occured after the routing and staking.
The order of the chronicling of events, and the logical order of the process of obtaining an option on land are in harmony.
Thus, it seems prudent to conclude that the option obtained in November of 1906 followed the locating of holes, routing and staking of the property to be bought.[/b]

I concede it’s quite possible that the course was routed fairly quickly, as that happens sometimes.  But it’s clear to me from your posts that you have no idea how that might come together. 
And, I do think I understand the process of routing with templates. 
I also note that the newspaper article of December notes that not all the holes had been picked yet, further suggesting the November time frame.

But really, Patrick, you can stop the gasbagging on some of your other points.  In these historical threads, the likes of Mike and I get thrashed by DM and TMac for even a hint of supposition,

I'm not responsible for posts made by David Moriarty and Tom MacWood, they can and do speak for themselves.[/color

while you are running rampant discussing how you think the golf course routed itself, etc.  It sure seems fair to have you play by the same rules.

Jeff, this is where I really have a problem with your presentation and your reasoning.
I didn't make the statement that the golf course routed itself.  MAX BEHR DID.
He was there, he is eminenlty qualified, he made the statement, I merely quoted him.
I think Max Behr's credentials qualify him to make that judgement, don't you ?
Max Behr declared that the course routed itself.
Understanding the OUT and BACK nature of the course, the starting and finishing points, the location of the ideal/classic holes, the boundaries, natural (water) and defined (Shinnecock Hills GC) I can see why Max Behr made that statement.  A statement I agree with despite your opinion to the contrary.  WHY do you doubt and challenge Max Behr's assessment ?[/b]

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

Your answers are so fricking delusional or obtuse, its not funny.

CBM told us he took an option in his own words, and it is you arguing that he didn't because it wouldn't be prudent.  Or you are arguing he took it after the land was decided upon. What reason would there be to do that?  Why not just buy it directly then?

Obviously, I can't see the option agreement from 1906, nor am I a NY real estate lawyer or broker, but I don't believe the basic premise of an option has changed a lot, but it might vary.

While I would like to believe that CBM and Alvord might work on a handshake "back in the good old days" in some ways business was more informal, and in others, it was more formal than today.  But why speculate on how they did business when CBM told us he took an option?

As to Max, I have no doubt in his abilities.  The only question is your definition of short order.  CBM tells us how many days he spent on an intial visit, tells us he followed up, and contemporaneous accounts tell us he had five months to finish it up, including that he started with the idea of 60 lots on the Sebonack site.  While I trust Scotland's Gift as a nice source, I don't think interpration of history is served by using only that, when other sources with more detail are available.  At the same time, relying on a second hand observation of Behr to make your points isn't as strong as using newspaper articles that quote CBM directly.

In reality, I just don't see that big a difference in our opinions of what CBM wrote.  Its just that I see more than a few days in routing, especially if you include tweaking, and at a longer time frame than you want to imagine for your own agenda.  And I think you are trying to argue away the option for reasons of your own, when CBM told us that is exactly what he did.  If he says it, why do you insist he did it on a handshake?

[JESII]

"Why not just buy it directly then?"


Jeff,

Isn't one potential answer to this that he needed to line up investors?



You guys have described a hell of alot of fixed points on the golf course as being identified by the end of the 2 or 3 days on horseback but refuse to agree that the routing was determined enough to take an option based on it. I wonder what I'm missing.

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

Did you just state that Max Behr was there WHEN the course was being routed? That is the apparent meaning of your statement "Jeff, this is where I really have a problem with your presentation and your reasoning. I didn't make the statement that the golf course routed itself.  MAX BEHR DID. He was there, he is eminenlty qualified, he made the statement, I merely quoted him.
I think Max Behr's credentials qualify him to make that judgement, don't you ? Max Behr declared that the course routed itself."

Of course he wasn't there when the course was routed and please show me exactly when he was on the course even during the building process. What he wrote wasn't anywhere near as contemporaneous as the newspaper articles that Mike has produced in which CBM is quoted giving details of what was being done at that time.

When did Behr make the statement?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

To be honest, the differences in our interpretations still lie in whether the bottom of page 187 is a retelling of the story, or a continuation of the timeline, after an odd insertion of wanting to play golf in nature, which seems totally out of place.

As usual, I think most of this discussion is semantics based on that difference of opinion, although I still will believe the option existed until proven otherwise.

Just in case I am reading things wrong on that, I would appreciate your interpretation of just why taking an option AFTER determining the specific land would be necessary.  Why do you say they cannot take an option for an undetermined parcel of 205 acres within a specific 450 acre parcel?  What do you think the purpose of the option was?

Jim,

I did offer that potential to line up investors in a post above.  I think he had his promises for $60K in subscriptions, but not the money in hand.  I found it odd that CBM would use that Dec. article to tell subscribers to send their money in.  The other article sounds more like he is just starting to go out and find subscribers, but I don't believe that was the case.

But, if existing subscribers hadn't actually sent in money, then the option could have solely been for the purpose of providing time for the collecting funds to pay off the $40K.  Also, the article notes that CBM was forming a temporary holding company until the final one was in place, so that could be a legal requirement to transfer the land to the final corporation.

However, both those articles say that as of Dec. 1906, the land boundary was not yet firmly settled, even though it had been “purchased” which we know is having been optioned for purchase.  

Given this direct evidence from two different newspaper sources, both quoting CBM and going into great detail (and probably able to access the land purchase records from the county recorder of deeds, too) I find it hard to believe anyone would seriously argue that the boundaries were completely fixed, and justify it by ignoring contemporaneous accounts, or quoting third party observers like Behr.  I don't know where or when Behr wrote of NGLA, but I agree with Phil, that it couldn't have been contemporaneous, and he was not a direct participant.

So, to answer your question about when the routing was fixed, it could still be a work in progress, with unknown finality at the time of purchase.  As I said before, I have no doubt that they picked up on the land for the Alps, Cape and Redan holes on an early pony ride, and even reference those.  But, the contemporary articles also sound like they hadn't connected the dots yet with the non template holes by December 1906, at least to me. 

Given CB had been working with the realty company since about June on another parcel, and that they directed him to the next site, he might have been riding that site on ponies many times and for many months, firming up his ideas substantially each time.  His account in Scotlands Gift doesn't give exact dates for the pony rides, subsequent visits, etc., so its all an assumption as to exactly when those were made.  As I said, the first telling makes it sound like the decision to buy came between the initial tours and the earnest study to finalize the routing.  I am just not sure that the dates mentioned for the option and purchase are perfectly chronological in SG, and supplement that with the newspaper articles, which tell us the routing had not been finalized as of Dec 1906.

And, again, I am not sure it really matters that much to how the project turned out whether he routed most of it pre option or most of it post option, or if he only made minor tweaks post option.  No doubt it was an ongoing process, as routing always is, and that the insertion of the "legal" dates of option and final purchase had any effect on what was in essence an continous period of refinement from the day CBM decided to buy that particular parcel.  The other factors that drove the design didn't change - the Inn, being the biggest example.

[JESII]

Jeff,

I admit to not being fully informed on details and writings, but I thought Max Behr was named by CBM as being on the design committee...yea or nay?




Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're saying in your last three paragraphs...the position I'm taking is that CBM optioned the 205 and retained the rights to tweak the exact property line as the holes came into shape.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

Sorry and I was editing my own post, but I looked at the committee listed in the articles above, and Behr's name is not listed. 

I am also saying he optioned 205 acres of the 450 for the purpose of tweaking the exact property lines.  I have no doubt that at that time, he had some of the basics in place, but we just don't know if it was 5 to 8 templates or all 18 holes, just needing to be wiggled around.  I doubt he had a blank slate of paper in his mind at that point, since he had ID'd the Alps, Redan, Cape, etc.

Maybe Patrick is saying the exact same thing, too, but seems to insist all 18 were routed on that first ride or very soon thereafter.  I agree with Mike that short time frames for routing are sort of mythical, when you look at the practical aspects non related to golf that have to be considered, like deciding where the clubhouse goes, how to fill swamps, etc.

I think Patrick has kind of a man crush on CBM, and secretly believes that he slipped into phone booths and wore a cape.

[Mike Cirba]

Guys, guys...some housekeeping, please.

First,

Max Behr was SO NOT INVOLVED WITH NGLA THAT HIS NAME DOES NOT EVEN APPEAR in "Scotland's Gift".

What he wrote in 1915 has been COMPLETELY MISCONSTRUED and COMPLETELY MISINTERPETED on this and other threads.

More on that later.

Next,

CBM already had ALL 60 Investors (and later 70) lined up and fully paid months prior to securing, much less purchasing the Sebonac Neck property.

He had cash in hand and was ready to make a deal from the time he met Alvord.

Finally,

Fixed Points??   Indicative of a routing??

My lord, then we can essentially say that any course where the location of the clubhouse is known, and where a few desirable features are found that can be incorporated for golf purposes is completely routed.

Jeff Brauer...better find yourself a new line of work.

I think we've got this whole routing process down here on GolfClubAtlas so we don't need you any longer.    

[JESII]

My bad on Max Behr, I haven't taken the time to read all the facts presented so I should back out or catch up...we'll see.

Re: the investors, interesting that he had the money in hand...I can't think of another reason he would hold off other than to make sure he had the exact width desired...which leads to the final/formal step...

On the rest Mike, yep I'm sorry but I can't see why a guy with that many fixed points in place wouldn't be able to fill in the blanks in short order and therefore select the location of the property boundaries down to a pretty tight margin of error...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

I wonder why that article gave specific instructions to subscribers as to how and where to send their money, then?  Well, reading it again, it could be information for new subscribers who wanted in on the hottest deal in town.  Or, maybe just more inaccurate gossip column stuff.  Maybe an early version of those emails from Africa asking for help in getting money out of the country?

Jim,

Mike hints at my anger with Pat....next guy to say you can route a course in short order gets it!

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Hang around...I have MUCH MORE STUFF coming on that whole issue of buying land versus the routing process very shortly.

AUTHORITATIVE stuff of how this whole process works...no more of this interpretive BS.


Jeff,

Cash in hand was overstatement on my part, sorry....he already had signed, contractual, promissory notes from all the investors he needed in hand.

Given their names and wallet sizes, he had cash in hand essentially.

[JESII]

Jeff,

If I showed you 450 acres and gave you a clubhouse location and 4 or 5 land forms you were absolutely going to use (including the direction you were going to approach them from) and three days to ride around the property do you think you could sketch out IN PENCIL the 205 acres you would want to buy?

I am sure I don't know 1% of what there is to know about routing a golf course but I have to believe this task is very possible for a professional.

[JESII]

Jim,

Hang around...I have MUCH MORE STUFF coming on that whole issue of buying land versus the routing process very shortly.

AUTHORITATIVE stuff of how this whole process works...no more of this interpretive BS.


Jeff,

Cash in hand was overstatement on my part, sorry....he already had signed, contractual, promissory notes from all the investors he needed in hand.

Given their names and wallet sizes, he had cash in hand essentially.

Mike,

On the first, great. I look forward to it.

On the stuff you just wrote to Jeff...are you kidding?

[Mike Cirba]

Ok...the problem with quotes, while useful, is that they often are missing context.

Here, from 1915, is the ENTIRE Max Behr article where somehow a meaning is being derived that CBM routed the course in 2 days on horseback.

Examine what Behr wrote in proper context and ask yourself if it differs from anything I've presented.  

Behr is not talking about routing the course at all when he talks about the course "laid itself out", but about the construction process.

He tells us,

1) First, the right sort of territory was found.

2) Then, the course was roughly sketched out using all the best features of the property.   I contend and believe ALL of the contemporaneous documents and CBM's own words show that this took place between securing of an "undetermined" 205 acres and the purchase of same.

3) Then, enough land was bought to embrace all the necessary features.

4) Then, in laying out the course (construction), no concession was made to economy in the use of land.

5) Even with that, a considerable part of the 205 acres is not used by the golf course.

[Mike Cirba]

p.s. to Jim...

It's also the reason that the artificial decapitation/truncation of the northern boundary of the Johnson Farm just 100 yards north of the quarry makes absolutely no sense at all, ESPECIALLY after CBM told already told them back on July 29th, 1910 that much could be made of that natural feature for golf.

btw..

Have you seen the list of names of the original founders?   $1,000 was chump change to them.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Thanks for the article.  I don't make much of it, but see below.

Jim,

Perhaps this is where Patrick and I would disagree.  No doubt that under the circumstances listed I could come up with 'A" routing for the property.  In fact, after noting the best features, I would probably come up with at least three potential quick routings, attacking all those features from every way imaginable, and connecting the dots.

But, I wouldn't stop there, esp. if building what I had already advertised as the worlds top course!  I would refine each, study them, eliminate two, but combine the best features of all, etc. and keep studying it until it was time to stop.  From time to time, like a test, the first routing is the best answer.  Most times, its a long trial and error routine, often with some painful choices as to which holes to keep and which to leave out.

So, could I do a quick routing?  Sure.  Would I?  Probably not.  Of course, I can't speak for CBM or others.  But, I think his words do, in the form of his writings and in what he told those reporters contemporaneously.  Now that I have read (I think I had seen that in the past) Behr quote again, I place even less stock in it as historical evidence, because he is writing on the topic of how much land, and is merely using NGLA as an example of ideal, which it was.

I hate to word parse it too much, but you will note Behr does say that land was bought to encompass all the features.  Then he mentions the laying out as a separate operation.  That suggests his understand was also that it was a two part process - finding the land generally (by picking the best landforms) - to buy the land, and then routing in a second operation.  And we know, CBM had his out even after taking the option, in the form of being able to tweak boundaries.

But, enough gasbagging from me. I am glad Mike will be able to post more info of the real variety soon.

[JESII]

Mike,

I'm baffled that the words "the course was roughly sketched out" do not convey the routing process.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Here is the original Founders agreement, pledged by the sixty (the seventy) original subscribers;

[JESII]

Thanks Mike,


Jeff,

Thanks for some insight into the process, I do appreciate it as it's the most baffling part of your profession to me. Baffling in the sense that I can't get my hands around how I would start and work through it if given the task so first hand insight is great. In the scenario I asked you about, would make any difference in your ability to generate a routing in short order if in addition to the features and fixed points I previously discussed you also knew the direction and length of holes deemed ideal for each feature located?

Also, Behr said CBM had "roughly sketched out the course" before acquiring the 205 acre option. Doesn;t this imply a great deal of the routing process was complete?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Where does it say that they sketched out the course before optioning the 205 undetermined acres?

It says they completed it prior to purchase, is all, which is true.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

The quickest type of course to route is a flat site. You can do what you want.

When you have features, sometimes they lay out in the "right places" and you can do it quickly.  In other cases, there are tricky corners (not an issue at NGLA), or a combination of features you want to use, but can't because they are too close or too far from the last hole you placed.  I can't imagine that trying to place holes with specific features and ideal lengths would make that process any easier than if you didn't really care if your Alps hole was any particular length.

But, in all cases, how do I know if I have the best routing, if I haven't tested a bunch of different options?  In a sense, its almost like buying the first house you look at.  I suppose there are cases where you see it, fall in love with it, etc. but most of us look around a little before settling on a house, at least if its important to us.  

And, as "his course" I think it was very important to him, as compared to Bendelow, whose main interest was getting up any course to further the game (at least early when he worked for Spaulding) or even Ross, who had a variety of commissions from Pinehurst to one day jobs.  If a client hired him for one day, he gave them a day.  

Would CBM do that in this case?  I doubt it.  As to what the sketching means, we just don't know.  I have finished golf courses and can go in my file and find literally dozens of tracing papers sketches of routings that never got incorporated in the final.  Are those the sketches he is talking about?  I have prepared up to 30 test routings for a golf course before deciding on one.  Granted, some are variations on a theme, as it were and in some semantic sense they could have honed in on general hole locations as Patrick suggests, and had to only figure out the details of connecting the dots.

I don't have that sense, but then, I have bias based on my experiences as well.  Great courses depend on great routings, and generally, great routings take some time.

Interesting side topic, but how many of the top 100 or whatever courses are one day paper jobs by Ross, Bendelow, or others?

[Mike Cirba]

Jima,

It is also important to recall that at the time CBM rode the property it had never been surveyed and was an inpenetrable mess of brambles and thickets and bogs.

Not exactly a routing dream scenario yet CBm tells us that he and Whigham saw enough good stuff to try to secure 205 acres if they could get a good price.

Still, at that time it was simply 205 out of 450 available.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Again, this is my experience, and not at all what may have happened, but on that type of property, they would see more in a final routing phase IF they were going round it in winter when some of the trees had dropped their leaves. Whether that entered their minds, I do not know.  I do know that going through the brambles hurts just as much winter or summer, so maybe not.

I also recall knowing sites, that I have sent more than one associate to flag the clearing down on the low side, where I am pretty sure the rose bushes are going to be while I take the high side, under the guise of "taking the harder walking as a favor to you."  But walking centerlines is always a bit easier in winter up north.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I have a question for you.

CBM himself is quoted in multiple NY papers as saying that he was going to spend the next several months working with his committe to determine which holes to reproduce as well as their yardages and this happened after he secured the 205 undetermined acres.

Why don't you believe him?

It's very clear that he's talking about the property he had just secured at Sebonac Neck...205 "undetermined" acres out of 450 available and he tells us exactly what his plans are in real time.

What is possibly unclear??

Max Behr's article talks about the process back then of securing enough land and then figuring out how to best fit 18 good golf holes on it as being the regular drill.   Why is that so preposterous that you can't buy a direct quote from CBM himself that this is what he was going to do?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff, Jim, et. al.,

I have a serious question for you.

Have you noticed that all of the DIFFERENT newspaper articles that Mike has posted say the exact same thing ?

They are NOT seperate articles, written by different, informed authors, they are merely COPIES of an original flawed article.

Mike likes to cite the12-15-06 article as his linchpin.
But, that article, claiming to quote Macdonald is so flawed that you can' believe that Macdonald was so unfamiliar with his site at NGLA that he mispoke.

As an example, that article claims that Macdonald stated that the turf at NGLA was exceptional.
Another that "fine turf" existed, another that the soil was better than that on the Atlantic side.

We KNOW that to be COMPLETELY FALSE.

HOW ? 
Macdonald tells us on page 188 that the land was IMPOVERISHED, that he had to import TEN THOUSAND (10,000) LOADS OF SOIL.
NOT 10,000 pounds, not 10,000 yards, but 10,000 LOADS of soil.

So how can you continue to accept these horrendously flawed newspaper articles as fact ?
Especially, when they're obvious, almost exact copies of previous, flawed newspaper articles.

Please reread the newspaper articles and you'll see that they're NOT contemporaneous accounts, merely one flawed account that gets published over and over again, where NO ONE corrects the obvious errors.

Jeff, you yourself pointed out a horrendous error in a newspaper article Mike had posted in your reply # 347.

All Mike does is report the same article that appears in different newspapers, but, it's the SAME article, not an additional article.

The use of the term, "contemporaneous accounts" is a farce, a deliberate attempt to mislead those reading this thread.

But, don't take my word for it, read all of the newspaper articles Mike's posted and you'll see that they're just the same version, with the same errors, the same language, published on different dates by different papers.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()