[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

No need to recite the timeline for me. I agree.  And I think I have seen DM write that he knows Wilson's contributions came later and were substantial to the produce we know today.  But, since the championship course we know evolved from a member friendly course when it opened, I think its funny how much time we spend arguing over the initial concepts! 

And, who should get credit for them?  I mean, if they get improved 4 years in, who wants credit for that?  As DM says, its great that so many holes have such a good routing framework as to stand the test of time, but the features placed on top of that routing evolved over time.

I did think most agreed that the trip came later than initial design of MCC, no?

[DMoriarty]

Notice how the mere mention that it was me who figured out what happened at Merion throws Mike into an name calling hissy fit?   My "agenda" was to figure out what happened, and while of course some details are missing (and probably always will be) I was largely successful.  That Mike and his cronies cannot seem deal with this fact is very telling.  

David,

As to the second green, yes the back looks too small to be a plateau to modern eyes, but I don't see the shaded area in the middle as a valley.  This puts me in an interesting position of having to decide who to believe (a la Groucho Marx) you, or my own eyes......

Believe what you want, but you are wrong.  Anyone with any familiarity with what was on the ground knows the green had a swale or hollow running across the middle of it, much like one would expect to see on a double plateau green, only with the swale horizontal.   The swale is visible in other aerials, including the 1930 aerial posted above.  There is a photo of someone in the swale floating around somewhere.  Here was a recent thread discussing the issue:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46732.0.html

Here is the Brooklyn Daily Eagle describing the hole in 1916.  Notice that the back area next to the bunker is not part of the green, and that the green had a large hollow running through the middle of it.  


From that description:   "The green is like the sixth at Sleepy Hollow, with a depression running across the middle of it."

Anyone know who designed Sleepy Hollow?
________________________________________________________

No one has yet mentioned that the hole is a par 4, whereas the 17th at TOC was surely still a par 5 at this time.  That is just one of the things that leads me to believe that the reason it was called a road hole was solely the OB carry on the right.  

The road hole bunker was there, so it was NOT just about the diagonal carry over OB.  As for the changes to the green, Mike's claim that the article I posted was about a different hole is bogus.  Even his own Faker cronies in Philadelphia have acknowledged that the 1917 article was discussing this hole!

And I agree that the argument over every little detail and what it means to CBM's contribution is getting fairly ridiculous.  I like your commment - "It was and is a terrific golf hole because at it's bones it was directly modeled on the fundamental strategic principles underlying on of the world's greatest golf holes!   And even after all these years and changes and attempts to water down the concepts, it remains a terrific hole where vestiges of the original concept remain viable!"  

At times we all forget that we wouldn't be arguing at all if it weren't for the greatness of Merion.

This was and is my entire point.   Merion's greatness is not due to superficialities like pretty bunkers, it is great to it its bones and it is great because if its bones.   That is the irony in all of this.  I am the one arguing for the greatness of Merion through and through.   All this crap being thrown out there by it supposed defenders - about how it is only great because of where Wilson placed some fairway bunkers or because Flynn made it all look pretty -  really sell the place well short!

That is the problem when these guys try to cut down and diminish everyone else but who they worship.  They  end up undermining their own position.  Merion is a hell of a lot better than these guys give it credit for, and for much more substantial reasons!  

[Patrick_Mucci]

You guys are funny.   You're so desperate to try and cllaim Merion as a CBM course without a single shred of evidence that you're now arguing that CBM's template holes didn't have proscriptive bunkering patterns.  

NO, that's not what I'm trying to argue.
You stated, unequivically, that the bunker patter "DEFINED" the template holes.
That's simply not true.
I cited, hole specifically, how you were wrong.

You know you're wrong, Jeff knows you're wrong, Jim knows you're wrong and i know you're wrong.
So what do you do, you change your position, but argue your revised position as if it was your original position.
That's disingenuous

Bunkering does NOT "DEFINE" template holes.
Redan, Long, Hogback, Plateau, Double Plateau, Biarritz, Valley just to name a few.

Please stop trying to present your altered/changed/modified position as if it was your original position.
Your typed words are proof positive that you erroneously declared the bunkers as the "defining" feature for template holes

That's desperation and it's transparent.

Sure, they had other features, such as the standard Biarritz "dip" between the front and back sections of green, and some of them were more descriptive of the natural contours such as "hogback", or "valley", but on nearly every template hole the holes are both visually and strategically defined by their bunkering pattern, usually in conjunction with a particular green orientation, or sometimes, its reverse.   But virtually every Biarritz on the planet also has long, framing, trench like bunkers curving along each side and that's undeniable.

You can repeat your claim over and over and over again.
It's NOT true.
The bunkers do NOT "DEFINE" template holes.

I think you all need to read George Bahto's book and not come back here until you do your homework!    


If that's your sole source of understanding template holes as crafted by CBM-SR-CB, I can see why you would make that statement.

It gets even funnier when we have David Moriarty claiming that William Evans, who tells us that he has just been over the changes on the course in person, "is getting ahead of himself".

Well, no...he "suspects" that he's getting ahead of himself.

His whole agenda is also transparent and yes, desperate, where he's now seemingly crying out for attention because he's failed to prove his specious theories to ANYONE except CBM-hero-worshiping Patrick with statements like this;

That's one of the most assinine statements you've made, and you've made plenty.
If your memory serves you for non-agenda driven subjects, you would recall that I disagree vehemently with David and Tom MacWood when they originally presented the case for CBM's significant involvement regarding the early design at Merion.  But, with the presentation of more and more information, it's become clear that CBM had a significant influence on the routing and design of Merion.

That to me this is absolutely awesome.  It casts Merion in an extremely favorable light and makes Merion even more relevant and impressive than it already was before I figured all of this stuff out!  Yet Merion is being duped and mislead by a couple of hacks and their lapdog, all with petty agendas, and all unable and unwilling to admit that someone else figured all this stuff out!   Ultimately, Merion's legacy suffers.

Merion's legacy is suffering because nobody believes David's ridiculous theories!   You absolutely can't make this stuff up!  

And Patrick...you have the nerve to ask people to come back to this site when you're backing a jerk just constantly spewing personally insulting garbage like that??!   You should be ashamed of yourself.

Encouraging TEPaul, Wayne and others to return as active participants has NOTHING to do with my opinion/position on any one thread, collection of threads, or the entire body of threads.

It has nothing to do with whether or not I agree or disagree with David, Tom MacWood or anyone else.

I MADE the request almost exclusively for TEPaul's benefit.
It was an attempt to bring someone, whom I'm very fond of, back into a forum that I know he misses and thrives in.
Obviously, you don't have the slightest understanding of my efforts.

Your attempt to disqualify and/or demonize participants, based on their position or opinion, is absurd.


Thanks for the comedy routine David and Patrick...I needed a good laugh on an early Monday morning.   You guys deserve each other.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

You wrote:It's funny...for years David and Tom MacWood have tried to cast doubt on the Philadelphia press crew (poor William Evans took a particularly nasty post-mortem beating for daring to write in October 1913 that Hugh Wilson, "some years ago before the new Merion course was constructed visited the most prominent courses here and in Great Britain and has no superior as a golf architect".   

Now evidently David is clinging to their every word!   

Regardless, the shameless, transparent ploy that Moriarty, MacWood, and Mucci (the 3M's) try to foist over everyone here is that if they can create some doubt on the veracity of a writer with any single fact that can be called into question, they can then summarily dismiss whatever else they wrote, even if that writer was someone like Evans who was among the most connected and respected writers for decades.


Would you cite, with precise specificity, where I tried to cast doubt on a writer on this thread ?

Once again you've resorted to a reckless statement in order to demonize anyone who doesn's share your opinion.

In particular, would you identify any comment/s I made challenging the veracity of William Evans.

Absent your ability to substantiate your wild, reckless and irresponsible claim, simply admitting that you were wrong will suffice..... for now.

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba,

You wrote:It's funny...for years David and Tom MacWood have tried to cast doubt on the Philadelphia press crew (poor William Evans took a particularly nasty post-mortem beating for daring to write in October 1913 that Hugh Wilson, "some years ago before the new Merion course was constructed visited the most prominent courses here and in Great Britain and has no superior as a golf architect".  

Now evidently David is clinging to their every word!    

Regardless, the shameless, transparent ploy that Moriarty, MacWood, and Mucci (the 3M's) try to foist over everyone here is that if they can create some doubt on the veracity of a writer with any single fact that can be called into question, they can then summarily dismiss whatever else they wrote, even if that writer was someone like Evans who was among the most connected and respected writers for decades.


Would you cite, with precise specificity, where I tried to cast doubt on a writer on this thread ?

Once again you've resorted to a reckless statement in order to demonize anyone who doesn's share your opinion.

In particular, would you identify any comment/s I made challenging the veracity of William Evans.

Absent your ability to substantiate your wild, reckless and irresponsible claim, simply admitting that you were wrong will suffice..... for now.

Patrick, Noone has done what Mike accuses us of doing.  All we have done is challenge Mike's tenuous interpretations of these various articles. The writers were competent, but Mike is incapable of figuring out how the articles fit with all the other information.  Yet despite the dozens of times Mike's interpretation has been proven wrong he continues to insist that his readings and interpretations are the only sound ones.

When I read Mike's past few posts above and his recent posts on the other thread, and cannot help but think of what may be the fundamental problem with with a forum like this.  Mike obviously has an agenda.  Just as obviously, he is not very good at this sort of analysis.  He is downright awful. Yet he continues to dominate the discussion by sheer will and sheer ignorance, never learning a thing.  

Like golf or anything else, there is a skill to this stuff.  Mike lacks that skill.  When it comes to this sort of analysis he is a double or triple bogey handicap, yet he continues to try to dominate these discussions as if he were scratch!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

I asked you, on a number of occassions to support your claim that Merion was designed by Wilson and the committee upon his return from the UK.

You never produced any concrete evidence to support your claim.

But, you did provide, in your own words, support for my position that the routing and individual hole designs were completed prior to Wilson sailing to the UK in March of 1912.  Basicallly, you've confirmed that the course was routed, with 18 tees and greens constructed and seeded, fully six months prior to Wilson's trip to the UK.

Thanks for finally confirming my position.

In reply # 124 you stated the following:

March 1911 – Visit Macdonald at NGLA and gain some valuable insight based on seeing drawings of holes abroad as well as hearing CBM pontificate on their principles, followed by a day seeing his application of those principles at NGLA.

March – April 6th – Wilson and Committee take what they’ve learned and created “five different” course layouts.   Macdonald makes his second visit to the property and after reviewing the land and the proposed layouts carefully, helps the committee select the best routing.

April 19th – The Merion Board gives approval to the selected and recommended plan and construction proceeds forthwith.

Late April – Fall 1911 – Construction of 18 tees and greens consistent with the routing that attempts to take best advantage of the natural features of the property takes place and by fall the property is seeded.[/color]

Winter 1911-12 – Wilson tells us that the committee worked all winter, although it’s unclear what they were doing at this point.

March 1912-May 1912 – Wilson goes abroad to study.


I'm sure, like many courses, that fine tuning continued for years and years after the course was initially designed, routed, constructed and seeded.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

I asked you, on a number of occassions to support your claim that Merion was designed by Wilson and the committee upon his return from the UK.

You never produced any concrete evidence to support your claim.

But, you did provide, in your own words, support for my position that the routing and individual hole designs were completed prior to Wilson sailing to the UK in March of 1912.  Basicallly, you've confirmed that the course was routed, with 18 tees and greens constructed and seeded, fully six months prior to Wilson's trip to the UK.

Thanks for finally confirming my position.

In reply # 124 you stated the following:

March 1911 – Visit Macdonald at NGLA and gain some valuable insight based on seeing drawings of holes abroad as well as hearing CBM pontificate on their principles, followed by a day seeing his application of those principles at NGLA.

March – April 6th – Wilson and Committee take what they’ve learned and created “five different” course layouts.   Macdonald makes his second visit to the property and after reviewing the land and the proposed layouts carefully, helps the committee select the best routing.

April 19th – The Merion Board gives approval to the selected and recommended plan and construction proceeds forthwith.

Late April – Fall 1911 – Construction of 18 tees and greens consistent with the routing that attempts to take best advantage of the natural features of the property takes place and by fall the property is seeded.[/color]

Winter 1911-12 – Wilson tells us that the committee worked all winter, although it’s unclear what they were doing at this point.

March 1912-May 1912 – Wilson goes abroad to study.


I'm sure, like many courses, that fine tuning continued for years and years after the course was initially designed, routed, constructed and seeded.

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

It's not a mystery and it's very well documented.

Please go back and ACTUALLY READ my reply #124 on this page.   Thanks.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

It's not a mystery and it's very well documented.

Please go back and ACTUALLY READ my reply #124 on this page.   Thanks.

Mike, I did better than read your reply, I directly quoted your reply # 124.
Are you now refuting your typed words ?

With the course routed, the individual holes designed, and under construction, including greens and tees, and then grassed, by late April 1911 to the fall of 1911, which is what you've declared, then Wilson's trip to the UK in March-May of 1912 had absolutely no bearing, absolutely no influence on the routing, individual hole designs and construction of the course, including the greens and tees since that was all done six months prior to his departure.

This is significant.

First, it debunks your promoting the theory that all of this was done after his trip.

Second, it almost makes the fine tuning, subsequent to Wilson's return, irrelevant in terms of who routed and designed Merion

It means that all of the heavy lifting was done at least a year before Wilson sailed abroad.

Hence, you can dismiss Wilson's trip in terms of its significance in the routing and initial design of Merion.

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

Wilson had already seen most of the best courses in the US, including NGLA and Garden City (and very likely Myopia, Chicago, and others) by the time he routed and built the initial tees and greens at Merion.   Accounts stated that he studied not only the best courses abroad, but also the best courses in this country.   He had also seen CBM's drawings and photos of the great holes abroad.   He had been a superb golfer for over a decade and had served on the Green Committee at Princeton while they were building their new course in 1901-02.

Other members of the committee, as well as Merion's Robert Lesley, travelled abroad repeatedly prior to then, as well.   Both Griscom and Dr. Toulmin had prior design/construction experience.

The Wilson trip abroad was a finishing school, prior to applying architectural touches and strategies (largely through the introduction of man-made hazards such as bunkering) influenced by those holes that happened AFTER the course was opened for play, as ALL the articles indicate.

Your points are true, but moot, and really tell us absolutely nothing.   If you have to reach so far as to state that a few template holes aren't defined largely by their bunkering patterns, I think you're really on the wrong side of understanding what actually happened back then.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wilson had already seen most of the best courses in the US, including NGLA and Garden City

Which ones other than GCGC and NGLA, and, he had only been to NGLA once, hadn't he ?
 
(and very likely Myopia, Chicago, and others) by the time he routed and built the initial tees and greens at Merion.  

That's pure speculationi on your part.
Why do you present it as fact ?

Accounts stated that he studied not only the best courses abroad, but also the best courses in this country.  
How could he have studied the best courses abroad when he didn't go abroad until 1912.
Merion was already routed and constructed before  set foot in the UK
How can you continue to make these outlandish claims.

Exactly what courses did he STUDY in the US prior to March of 1911

He had also seen CBM's drawings and photos of the great holes abroad.  

According to you, he only saw them on one occassion.
And you're saying that that qualified him to be an eminent architect ?
That qualified him to be put in charge of the project and route the course and design the  individual holes ?
Does anyone else buy into your theory ?



He had been a superb golfer for over a decade

So was Gary Player

and had served on the Green Committee at Princeton while they were building their new course in 1901-02.
And, serving on a green committee qualified him to be an eminent architect ?
To be put in charge of routing and designing a golf course ?
I think not.

Other members of the committee, as well as Merion's Robert Lesley, travelled abroad repeatedly prior to then, as well.   Both Griscom and Dr. Toulmin had prior design/construction experience.

Then why weren't they named Chairman if they had more experience.

Could it be, that Wilson was appointed Chairman of the Construction Committee for one purpose ?
To BUILD the golf course according to the plans that were approved, plans where his role was not that of designer/architect

The Wilson trip abroad was a finishing school, prior to applying architectural touches and strategies (largely through the introduction of man-made hazards such as bunkering) influenced by those holes that happened AFTER the course was opened for play, as ALL the articles indicate.

Horseshit.  The course was in the ground, the routing set in stone and the individual hole designs completed

Your points are true, but moot, and really tell us absolutely nothing.

Of course my points are true.
And, they tell you plenty unless you have a closed mind 

If you have to reach so far as to state that a few template holes aren't defined largely by their bunkering patterns, I think you're really on the wrong side of understanding what actually happened back then.

Do you actually THNIK before yu type.
You were the one who stated that bunkering defined the template holes, when we know that's NOT true.

To help you out on  this, pretend for a second that I built a redan, only I didn't include any bunkering.
Do you think the position of the bunkers are vital to identifying the hole as a redan ?

Same question, ALPS hole ?

The bunkers are window dressing.

The CORE, the HEART of the hole is its physical properties, not the precise location of the bunkers.

It's one of the most absurd arguments you've put forth, and you've put forth plenty of absurd arguments.

But, let me leave you with this.

Here's what Ran Morrissett has said about the early deisgn of golf courses

"The architectural skill employed in these courses is minimal and yet the lesson learned is invaluable: nature provides the most enduring challenge. The architects of this day spent only one or two days on site to stake out the tees and greens. They had few decisions to make: they didn’t have the ability to move much land. These courses have been largely modified over the past century to adjust to equipment changes."

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

I don't have time to answer your same questions over and over.

The funny thing is that you consider yourself an impartial, unbiased observer when you're simply a Macdonald groupie.

That's ok...he was a great architect and I love his courses, but he didn't design Merion and he never said he did, nor did anyone else.

If you have ANY evidence to the contrary, it's well past time for you and David to put it out there because all I hear is crickets when I ask that question.

[JESII]

I wonder if anything else at all will ever be discovered. It'll be fireworks around here if and when...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

I don't have time to answer your same questions over and over.

Mike, they're NOT the same questions and you never answered them the first time or any time.

The funny thing is that you consider yourself an impartial, unbiased observer when you're simply a Macdonald groupie.
It might appear that way to you and to other Phillyfanatics, but, I'm really looking to identify and pin point who did what and when.
You make rash, irresponsible statements, holding them out as factual, and I continue to challenge them.
When concrete documentation is provided, I'll support the evidence, not an agenda.
You should try to do the same.

That's ok...he was a great architect and I love his courses, but he didn't design Merion and he never said he did, nor did anyone else.

There you go again, deliberately making a statement that you KNOW is UNTRUE>

Whigham stated that Macdonald designed Merion, and YOU KNOW THAT.
So why lie and state that no one ever said he did.

Here's the quote:

"The Macdonald-Raynor courses became famous all over America. 
Among the most famous are Piping Rock, the Merion Cricket Club at Philadelphia, the Country Club of Saint Louis, two beautiful courses at White Sulphur, the Lido (literally poured out of the lagoon), and that equally amazing Yale course at New Haven, which was hewn out of rock and forest at the expense of some seven hundred thousand dollars."

As to Whigham's qualifications:

"H.J. Whigham was the 1896 United States Amateur Champion Golfer and one of the foremost authors and experts on golf courses in America and abroad.   He helped Macdonald route NGLA and was involved in its creation.  The two of them co-authored the 1914 series on ideal golf holes (including the Alps and the Redan) for Golf Illustrated.  Outside of golf, he was an expert, author, and commentator on foreign affairs, a reporter, a war correspondent, an author on architecture, editor of Metropolitan Magazine and Town and Country, and golf editor of Country Life.   I am sure there is more, but I don't know it offhand. 

More importantly, H.J. Whigham was there.
- He was there with June 1910 when Merion brought H.J. Whigham and C.B. Macdonald in to inspect the potential golf site.
- He was there at NGLA in March 1911, when Wilson and his Committee traveled to NGLA so that CBM and HJW could teach them about the underlying fundamental principles of the great golf holes, and how these kinds of holes fit onto the natural features in at Ardmore. 
- He was there in April 1911 when Merion brought CBM and HJW back to Ardmore to review the land again and to choose the final routing.   

Bottom line is that H.J. Whigham knew first-hand who came up with the hole concepts and placement for Merion East.  He knew first-hand that CB Macdonald was the creative driving force behind the routing and hole concepts.   We have no reason to doubt him. 
-  So far as I know, Hugh Wilson never claimed to have come up with the hole concepts or the routing.
-  So far as I know, Hugh Wilson never wrote anything that contradicts Whigham on this issue.  In fact, while Hugh Wilson's 1916 work doesnt ever directly address the issue of who was primarily responsible for the routing and hole concepts, his account is entirely consistent with Whigham's.   
-  No one who was there contradicts Whigham wrote anything necessarily contradicting Whigham. 

Some dismiss Whigham's word as the emotional blubbering of a grief-stricken son-in-law [Ironically, these same people hold up the Alan Wilson letter, written after his younger brother's untimely death, as a holy grail.]  They obviously haven't considered the man or his life experiences.  Whigham didn't just sob out his father-in-law's eulogy, he authored important obituaries for such notable men as President Theodore Roosevelt.   

So yes, there is written proof that Merion East is a CBM course.   H.J. Whigham, tell us so.   He was not only there, he was knew what was going on, and he knew how to accurately describe it.  ..."


If you have ANY evidence to the contrary, it's well past time for you and David to put it out there because all I hear is crickets when I ask that question.

That's because you're tone deaf when the subject is Merion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Another item which seems to be taking on less significance is the official date of any land swap.

It seems to me that the parties in charge, had everything under control, in terms of the land to be used, and that the official dates of the swap is almost irrelevant.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Here's your time line.

March 1911 – Visit Macdonald at NGLA and gain some valuable insight based on seeing drawings of holes abroad as well as hearing CBM pontificate on their principles, followed by a day seeing his application of those principles at NGLA.

March – April 6th – Wilson and Committee take what they’ve learned and created “five different” course layouts.   Macdonald makes his second visit to the property and after reviewing the land and the proposed layouts carefully, helps the committee select the best routing.

April 19th – The Merion Board gives approval to the selected and recommended plan and construction proceeds forthwith.

Late April – Fall 1911 – Construction of 18 tees and greens consistent with the routing that attempts to take best advantage of the natural features of the property takes place and by fall the property is seeded.


You would have us believe, that Wilson and the committee members, guys who had never designed a golf course in their lives, guys  who spent two days with CBM and HJW, were sufficiently prepared by that meeting at NGLA that they returned to Ardmore, and in less than 30 days crafted five routings, complete with individual hole designs.  One of which would become Merion ?

Does anyone believe that's how it actually happened ?

That Wilson and his attending committee had individual and a collective epiphany, an elightenment that imbued them with years of architectural expertise, such that they could perform this Herculian task within 30 short days.

Didn't you tell us that it took months if not years for Macdonald and Whigham to route NGLA ?
And Macdonald had already designed golf courses, he had already routed and designed individual holes, after years and years and years of earnest studying, here and abroad.  

Yet, these amateurs, inspired by a single evening at NGLA, in less than 30 days, produced not one routing, not two routings, not even three or four routings, but, FIVE routings all by themselves, and without any assistance.

Does anyone other than yourself believe that's how it happened ?

[Dan Herrmann]

(I thought we were talking about strategy off the tee for the pro?)

[JESII]

(I thought we were talking about strategy off the tee for the pro?)

We are...but establishing some baseline is obviously the key.

For instance, don't you think the pro's play Pete Dye courses different than they play Tom Fazio courses.

In that same vai, the pro's tee shot strategies during the 2013 US Open will be predicated on who the actual designer of the course is...so we better get to work fellas...

[JESII]

Another item which seems to be taking on less significance is the official date of any land swap.

It seems to me that the parties in charge, had everything under control, in terms of the land to be used, and that the official dates of the swap is almost irrelevant.

I don't understand why...fr example, if we knew exactly when it was, without doubt, it would likely tell us when the bulk of the initial routing work was completed. That's important to me in determining if it was before o after they selected the actual land they were going to buy.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

Good morning and yeah, me and millions of others do believe that's the way it happened! Not really so crazy back in the day. 

What's crazy is thinking that MCC relied on almost totally on CBM, and he created them a great golf course, but a year later they decided that Hugh Wilson should design the west course rather than go back to the source of their success!

If Hugh hadn't been a big part of routing the first course, what would have qualified him to route the second, as the same scenario would apply, no?  Seeing someone else do it is not the same as having the ability to do it.  You could sit around and watch Tom Doak route a 100 courses, and possibly not be able to ever route one yourself. 

We also know that CBM advised many clubs in this time period, before putting Raynor out there full time, and didn't seek design credit.

And, history shows Wilson had a knack for it, since he went on to other designs, based on what - CBM having designed Merion?  Hugh Wilson had some talent for it.  The club minutes say that the routed the golf course and CBM approved.  To what degree, we do not know, but they sure got the inspirations for some holes at Merion from him, and also improved many later.

They said the committee did most of the work, and I believe them.  They said CBM was a trusted advisor, and I believe them.  While I would love to have been a fly on the wall, I don't think there is much point in pushing your agenda much further.  I am not even quite sure what it is, since most of us agree on the basic outlines.  We just cannot know

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

The other day, you mentioned that Mike and I believe it occurred after April 19.  Just to clarify, I have theorized that it happened just a few nights (maybe just one night) before CBM came back on April 6.  CBM's upcoming visit might be the thing that would trigger the excited, midnight work by Francis.  He certainly describes it as the final piece of the puzzle and also makes it sound like construction was imminent, also suggesting April, but the blasting story has some questions around it.

[JESII]

Jeff,

I may have written it poorly but I was trying to say that you and Mike have said in the past that it was more likely to have happened after April 19th than before November 15th. I've always believed your opinion was that it happened soon before April 6th.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike Cirba,

Here's your time line.

March 1911 – Visit Macdonald at NGLA and gain some valuable insight based on seeing drawings of holes abroad as well as hearing CBM pontificate on their principles, followed by a day seeing his application of those principles at NGLA.

March – April 6th – Wilson and Committee take what they’ve learned and created “five different” course layouts.   Macdonald makes his second visit to the property and after reviewing the land and the proposed layouts carefully, helps the committee select the best routing.

April 19th – The Merion Board gives approval to the selected and recommended plan and construction proceeds forthwith.

Late April – Fall 1911 – Construction of 18 tees and greens consistent with the routing that attempts to take best advantage of the natural features of the property takes place and by fall the property is seeded.


You would have us believe, that Wilson and the committee members, guys who had never designed a golf course in their lives, guys  who spent two days with CBM and HJW, were sufficiently prepared by that meeting at NGLA that they returned to Ardmore, and in less than 30 days crafted five routings, complete with individual hole designs.  One of which would become Merion ?

Does anyone believe that's how it actually happened ?

That Wilson and his attending committee had individual and a collective epiphany, an elightenment that imbued them with years of architectural expertise, such that they could perform this Herculian task within 30 short days.

Didn't you tell us that it took months if not years for Macdonald and Whigham to route NGLA ?
And Macdonald had already designed golf courses, he had already routed and designed individual holes, after years and years and years of earnest studying, here and abroad.  

Yet, these amateurs, inspired by a single evening at NGLA, in less than 30 days, produced not one routing, not two routings, not even three or four routings, but, FIVE routings all by themselves, and without any assistance.

Does anyone other than yourself believe that's how it happened ?

I don't believe it. It defies logic, but attachment to legends turns normally clear thinkers into emotional basket cases.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

Well some legends do.  Like the Edmund Fitzgerald.  But having followed this, I don't know that anyone has really said this is a legend, other than you.  The club reported it initially, before anyone would get attached to it.  A few transcription errors occurred along the way. 

But, at what point do you believe that Merion started purposely fudging the truth about their history to create (or at least enhance?) Hugh Wilson's legendary status?  Since you throw that out there as a "truth" I suppose that is as worth analyzing as triangles and land swaps, no?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TMac,

Well some legends do.  Like the Edmund Fitzgerald.  But having followed this, I don't know that anyone has really said this is a legend, other than you.  The club reported it initially, before anyone would get attached to it.  A few transcription errors occurred along the way. 

But, at what point do you believe that Merion started purposely fudging the truth about their history to create (or at least enhance?) Hugh Wilson's legendary status?  Since you throw that out there as a "truth" I suppose that is as worth analyzing as triangles and land swaps, no?

Jeff,

Do you think that Merion  stating on their website that the golf course was designed AFTER Wilson returned from his trip to the U.K. Was an attempt to skew the truth or just an honest mistake ?   After all they did possess all of the archival documents, no ?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()