[Tom MacWood]

Mike
One more time...how you do know those early holes were laid out by Crump? What evidence have you found? I thought it was a group effort; 18 investors designing 18 holes, with a committee having final say.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

If you'd like to credit the Construction Committee with the design of those holes, I have no issue with that, although I do believe that George Crump was the guy calling the shots.

Iin April 1915 Tillinghast wrote;

At Pine Valley the new
holes will be completed as
rapidly as possible. The
original plans have been
changed slightly for Mr.
Crump uncovered a magnificent
hole when he cut
the timber from the ridge
which is encountered when
the 12th green is quitted.
The drive is across a deep
depression and unless the
shot is a long one the green
will not be in sight. Along
the left of the fairway extends
a pronounced throw
which will take a hooked
ball and send it far from the "straight
and narrow." This new 13th certainly
is one of the best of any on the new
course.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

You keep referring to Tillinghast's statement about Colt in 1914, but what about Tillinghast's statement in February 1918, after Crump's death?

In the past few years
he devoted almost his entire time to
the construction of the famous Pine
Valley course at Clemonton, New Jersey.
He discovered this wonderful
tract of land when it was covered with
trees and to many it seemed like folly
to attempt transforming it to a golf
course. But with great courage and
patience Mr. Crump stuck doggedly
to his task. With his own money he
purchased the land, afterwards turning
it over to the club which was
formed. He built a bungalow and
lived on the tract, personally overseeing
every detail of the construction.
After seeking the advice of the most
widely known course architects, he
carefully reviewed their suggestions,
rejecting many, accepting some but it
must be said that the entire credit for
this course of wonderfully fine holes
must be given to Mr. Crump himself.
It is not completed yet, for four holes
have to be finished.
Experts have been loud in their
praise of Mr. Crump and his great
work and often enough one heard the
remark: "This course must ever be a
monument to the man who found it
and made it." And now in stunning
suddenness, the man is called by death
before he saw his work completed.
But that work of his lives and it has
not been in vain.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

If you'd like to credit the Construction Committee with the design of those holes, I have no issue with that, although I do believe that George Crump was the guy calling the shots.

1915 is immaterial. We are discussing early 1913 and those early holes. At that time the idea was to have eighteen investors each design a hole, with a committee having final say. You have admit that is a goofy plan, and its easy to see why Colt was brought in.

[DMoriarty]

Still not sure how we can exclude Colt's involvement before his 1913 trip. even if at a distance.  They had mail and maps and we still have Hawtree's report of Colt having been there on his first trip, and AWT's account that the land had been in play as early as 1910-1911.

Which map is this?   It looks like the one from the paper, but is a little different . . .

[Tom MacWood]

That looks like the Ebay map, although its not the same image Mike posted the other day.

[Mike Cirba]

I'm struck by the similarity of what Tllinghast wrote about Crump in 1918 to what Max Behr wrote about CB Macdonald, Herbert Leeds, and Hugh Wilson in 1914.

By far the best work in this or any
other country has not been done by committees but
by dictators. Witness Mr. Herbert Leeds at Myopia,
Mr. C. B. Macdonald at the National, and Mr.
Hugh Wilson at the Merion Cricket Club. These
dictators, however, have not been averse to taking
advice. In fact they have taken advice from everywhere,
but they themselves have done the sifting.
They have studied green keeping and course construction
as it was never studied before. And they have
given the benefit of their studies to the world at large.

He built a bungalow and
lived on the tract, personally overseeing
every detail of the construction.
After seeking the advice of the most
widely known course architects, he
carefully reviewed their suggestions,
rejecting many, accepting some but it
must be said that the entire credit for
this course of wonderfully fine holes
must be given to Mr. Crump himself.


One would think Patrick Mucci, who has long espoused here the model of the benevolent dictator as the best approach to governing a club, would immediately recognize and embrace what each of these clubs and their dictators did and the wisdom of that approach in creating great golf courses.   And today, in each of those examples and other similar ones like Fownes at Oakmont, or Herb Windeler at Brookline, the proof of the pudding is in the excellent end result.   One would think that should be obvious to Patrick, who seems only ready to embrace the evidence in the case of his hero, CB Madonald, yet strangely questions the known documented histories of all the others.

Perhaps on second thought, it shouldn't really be surprising.   As the saying goes, politics makes very strange bedfellows, indeed!    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom  and David,

HOW is that Map different from the map Mike posted AND the map that appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer ?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom  and David,

HOW is that Map different from the map Mike posted AND the map that appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer ?

It is the same map Mike posted, but a different image. Mike's had a little higher resolution and was flattened out. I suspect the image David posted was taken from Ebay.

The primary differences in the two maps:

The 7th is dog-legged.
The second map has roman numerals.
The second map has yardages.
The second map has the swamp identified.
There are a few minor differences in the bunkering.

[Mike Cirba]

What would be the technology in 1913 that would take a full-scale architectural drawing on linen and reduce it to a few inches for portrayal in a newspaper?

[Tom MacWood]

What would be the technology in 1913 that would take a full-scale architectural drawing on linen and reduce it to a few inches for portrayal in a newspaper?

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure it was lithography technology, which had been going on for a while by 1913. It was how they were able to reproduce large paintings in books, etc.

That Inquirer plan obviously had a larger original version which is the base of the red and blue plan at PVGC. I wonder how many different plans Colt produced.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Unlike you, I"m not willing to make quantum leaps of faith absent hard evidence.
"Scotland's Gift" could certainly be deemed to be hard evidence.

I don't believe that similar, detailed, evidence exists at Merion or Pine Valley

There is no documented evidence, specifically detailing any routing or hole by hole design work on Wilson's part at Merion.

While there may be more evidence of Crump's work, I believe the specificity, regarding the design of each hole and part of the routing is still a mystery to many.

You seem all too willing to credit Wilson and Crump by default, rather than by documentation.

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

So, if Wilson and Crump had lived to ripe old ages and had claimed sole credit in autobiographies then this would be a closed case?

Much as you might think we do, we have no more real understanding of the "hole by hole", feature by feature details of who among Macdonald's Committee was responsible for the details of any particular piece of NGLA than we do for Merion or Pine Valley.

We can't look at any particular hole, or feature on any particular hole, and say, ah...that's CBM's idea...or, ahh...that's Whigham...or ahhh...that's Travis, or Emmet, or Hutchinson, or others who were involved.

What we DO KNOW, in ALL of these cases, is WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE for DECISION MAKING in terms of what ideas to use, and what ideas to discard, no matter who advised.  THAT is fundamental, and that is where the buck stops now and always has.

I'm very open to discussion here, and more than open to additional discovery.

The problem is, I'm virtually the only one actually producing evidence here, much of which was found by Joe Bausch.

If you guys find something, let's discuss it.   Right now, that's where the big gaping void is.

[Tom MacWood]

Patrick,

So, if Wilson and Crump had lived to ripe old ages and had claimed sole credit in autobiographies then this would be a closed case?

Much as you might think we do, we have no more real understanding of the "hole by hole", feature by feature details of who among Macdonald's Committee was responsible for the details of any particular piece of NGLA than we do for Merion or Pine Valley.

We can't look at any particular hole, or feature on any particular hole, and say, ah...that's CBM's idea...or, ahh...that's Whigham...or ahhh...that's Travis, or Emmet, or Hutchinson, or others who were involved.

What we DO KNOW, in ALL of these cases, is WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE for DECISION MAKING in terms of what ideas to use, and what ideas to discard, no matter who advised.  THAT is fundamental, and that is where the buck stops now and always has.

I'm very open to discussion here, and more than open to additional discovery.

The problem is, I'm virtually the only one actually producing evidence here, much of which was found by Joe Bausch.

If you guys find something, let's discuss it.   Right now, that's where the big gaping void is.

Mike
Are you joking? One historical account is the last thing historians put stock in. There have been so many examples where the last man standing wrote a history that was fictionalized. A good example are the Conquistadors in S.America and their account, which has been proven to be complete fiction, but the legend grew and grew, and no one questioned it (like you). The idea that a small rag tag group of conquistadors could overtake a continent made no sense, and it turns out the story was largely fiction. I have found that whenever a story or legend does not makes sense or is illogical, there is usually more to the story, and obviously that is the case at Merion and PV. Even you have to admit that. The challenge for historians is to open up the minds of those so emotionally invested in these legends.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

So, if Wilson and Crump had lived to ripe old ages and had claimed sole credit in autobiographies then this would be a closed case?
It would certainly be a significant document upon which to rely.
Presently we do not know who routed Merion, nor do we know who designed each individual hole at Merion.
An account by Wilson detailing that info would be invaluable
 

Much as you might think we do, we have no more real understanding of the "hole by hole", feature by feature details of who among Macdonald's Committee was responsible for the details of any particular piece of NGLA than we do for Merion or Pine Valley.

You must be out of your mind.
There's no comparison between the documented history at NGLA and the UNdocumented history at Merion.
PV has more documented history than Merion but far less than NGLA

We can't look at any particular hole, or feature on any particular hole, and say, ah...that's CBM's idea...or, ahh...that's Whigham...or ahhh...that's
Travis, or Emmet, or Hutchinson, or others who were involved.

Of course you can.
CBM conceptualized the ideal holes and then informed us that he found them long before Travis, Emmet or Hutchinson stepped foot on the property.

YOU may be in denial regarding who did the work at NGLA, but the rest of the world isn't

What we DO KNOW, in ALL of these cases, is WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE for DECISION MAKING in terms of what ideas to use, and what ideas
to discard, no matter who advised.  

You do NOT know that at Merion

You don't even know if Wilson was involved pre-construction committee formation

THAT is fundamental, and that is where the buck stops now and always has.

You're in denial regarding the facts

You don't know who crafted the routings or who decided on which one to select.
Prior to the formation of the construction committee, you don't know who made the decisions

I'm very open to discussion here, and more than open to additional discovery.
The problem is, I'm virtually the only one actually producing evidence here, much of which was found by Joe Bausch.


Evidence of what ?

You haven't provided one specific detail as to who routed the course or designed each hole and feature.

If you guys find something, let's discuss it.   Right now, that's where the big gaping void is.

The gaping void is that there is NO specific evidence supporting the claim that Wilson routed the course and designed each hole, which is what the myth alleged.

The gaping void is the lack of specific details

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

So, if Wilson and Crump had lived to ripe old ages and had claimed sole credit in autobiographies then this would be a closed case?


It would certainly be a significant document upon which to rely.
Presently we do not know who routed Merion, nor do we know who designed each individual hole at Merion.
An account by Wilson detailing that info would be invaluable
 

Patrick,

We have something even better than Wilson claiming credit.   We have all of the members of his committee concurring that he was in the main responsible for the architecture of the East course at Merion, and Richard Francis writing his remembrances claiming the same thing.

We also have Tillinghast having seen the plans for Merion prior to construction, having also had conversations with CBM, and he made clear as well that Wilson and his Committee were the architects.

Generally, I like those type of sources better than first-person accounts claiming authorship.

We also have the Minutes of the Merion Cricket Club telling us that the Committee were the ones who came up with the various plans for the course, and that CBM was brought down to help the Committee select their best plan.   Why in the world would someone have to come down to approve their own plan if CBM was indeed the author?!   It's preposterous, of course, but that won't stop you guys and your wishful thinking. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

We have something even better than Wilson claiming credit.   We have all of the members of his committee concurring that he was in the main responsible for the architecture of the East course at Merion, and Richard Francis writing his remembrances claiming the same thing.
Mike,

You're deluding yourself again.
By your logic, Mike Pascucci did the routing and designed all of the holes at Sebonack,
Ken Bakst the same at Friar's Head and Lowell Schulman the same at Atlantic.

The fact is you don't know what Wilson did at Merion.
You can't cite, with specificity, any routing or hole designs directly attributable to him.

You keep repeating your mantra absent any shred of documented proof.

We also have Tillinghast having seen the plans for Merion prior to construction, having also had conversations with CBM, and he made clear as well that Wilson and his Committee were the architects.

Would you again show us the citation where AWT states, unequivically, that Wilson routed the course and designed each and every hole.

We also have Alex Findlay, contemporaneously writing, unequivically, that CBM designed the holes.

Generally, I like those type of sources better than first-person accounts claiming authorship.

I agree, the Findlay account is irrefutable.

We also have the Minutes of the Merion Cricket Club telling us that the Committee were the ones who came up with the various plans for the course,

That's not quite what the minutes state.
Would you tell us, with specificity, who crafted each of the five routing, especially the one selected.
For all you know, CBM could have crafted all five with the committee deciding on one of the five.
In your eyes, you would credit the committee with the design, whereas the rest of the intelligent world would credit CBM.

and that CBM was brought down to help the Committee select their best plan. 

Not "THEIR" best plan, but, "THE" best plan.
There's a distinct difference.  

Why in the world would someone have to come down to approve their own plan if CBM was indeed the author?!   

Quite simply to advocate and choose the best of his five plans.

It's preposterous, of course, but that won't stop you guys and your wishful thinking. 

Mike, if anyone has embarked upon the journey of wishful thinking it's you.
There's not a shred of specific evidence attributing the routing and individual hole design to Wilson.
That's wishful thinking on your part.

[Tom MacWood]

In March of 1913 Tilly wrote this in American Cricketer:

"Each of the eighteen holes will be designed by a prominent Philadelphia golfer, although the suggestions will, of necessity, be carefully considered by the committee, and in many details changed in order to insure variety and balance."

They must have never heard the line about a camel being a horse designed by a committee, or maybe they did hear it and thats why they brought in Colt. 

[JESII]

Tom,

Do you think they fully abandoned the original idea of 18 different holes immediately after that article was written? When did Colt arrive at Pine Valley?

Doesn't the fact that the plan in March of 1913 clearly indicate that Colt was not involved prior to then? Perhaps some routing insight?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Do you think they fully abandoned the original idea of 18 different holes immediately after that article was written? When did Colt arrive at Pine Valley?

Doesn't the fact that the plan in March of 1913 clearly indicate that Colt was not involved prior to then? Perhaps some routing insight?

Colt came in May, and yes I do think they abandoned the original idea. It was a stupid idea and it was never mentioned again. I don't believe Colt had anything to do with the course prior to May, or should I say I've not found any evidence to suggest he was involved prior to May. I don't understand what you are asking about routing insight. As I said before I believe Colt incorporated a few of the early holes into his plan (#1 and #2, and parts of #3 and #4).

[Tom MacWood]

Can anyone explain why the majority of contemporaneous reports give credit to Colt? William Evans, Findlay, Carr, Tilly, Travis, Travers, Colt, Alison, Sayers and Rice all claimed Colt laid out the course.

Many have concluded Colt made his one visit in 1913 submitted a plan and that was it, but I think there is good evidence to suggest he continued to advise Crump. There is the second plan from 1/1914 that is clearly from Colt. Colt came to America in 5/1914, and it was reported he would be visiting PV. I don't know if he visited or not, but obviously he was still engaged. And then there is the portfolio of photographs Crump sent to Colt, which from what I know about those photos must have been around 1915 or 1916. Among those photos was a photo of the proposed 15th tee. And finally bringing in Colt & Alison to finish the job after WWI. It seems obvious to me Crump and Colt were in close contact for several years.

[Joe Bausch]

The article that begins this thread by Rice indicates accomplished amateur golf John G. Anderson accompanied him on the trip to PV in 1916.

Anderson wrote for the NY Sun, and not long after Crump's death he penned this article, published on February 4, 1918, and it is a good read, IMO:

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()