[Mike Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

In December, 1909 issue of American Golfer, the same one that has the picture of George Crump getting off the train in Atlantic City, Tillinghast reported;

Some four or five years ago a
party of Philadelphia golfers at Atlantic
City decided that in order to
improve their play, a premium of one
ball from each player should be given
the man who succeeded in making any
hole in one less than par; in other
words, accurate play up to the "tee,"
rather than onto the green in general
was encouraged and rewarded. The
innovation met with immediate favor,
and from its nest in Philadelphia the
Birdie has taken wing to all parts of
the country. Sometime after the
hatching of the Birdie another feathered
feature was given to golf—the
Eagle, which soars even higher than
the Birdie and is consequently doubly
rewarded. To secure an Eagle one
must hole out in two less than par,
thereby receiving from each opponent
three balls (two for the Eagle and one
for the Birdie). And while the best of
players average but one or possibly
two Eagles in a season, that rara avis
was brought down twice in one day,
and once again before the week was
over by Mr. George A. Crump on the
second hole at the Philadelphia Country
Club. The distance of 525 yards
demanded a par of 5, but Mr. Crump
was so fortunate as to gobble it in
3 on each occasion.


On what basis are you contending that George Crump played no further golf with friends, or socially, or with his regular "ballsome" of friends in Atlantic City throughout the winter of 1909/1910?

Is this snippet from a November 1910 American Golfer article talking about the Tournament Scene in Philadelphia that year your only source for your claim that Crump played no golf in 1910...not even his regular group through the previous winter?...and that Tillinghast also played no golf in 1910?  

What day did Crump stop playing?   Was it November 13th?   December 20th?   December 31st??



The article goes on to state;

Mr. A. W. Tillinghast has absented
himself from the tournaments, but he
has been very actively engaged in the
development of the new course of the
Shawnee Country Club. He returned
to town for the St. Martins tournament
and was successful in the handicap,
winning the gross score prize.
Mr. R. E. Griscom appears but rarely
and unfortunately this, too, is true of
Mr. Hugh Wilson, Mr. Charles Farnum,
Mr. George Cook, Mr. Robert
James, Mr. F. H. Bohlen, Mr. Clayton
Dixon, the brothers Lineaweaver
and many others.


Did any of these men play golf in 1910?   Or did they all quit that year, as well?

[JESII]

Tom,

The train story doesn't pass your smell test because it's unreasonable to believe he first spotted the site in 1910 when he had been past it several times before?

Why is the hunting story more logical on that basis? What difference does it make how many other sites he/they considered?


Pat,

How 'bout those 40 foot trees? You claim to have photos from the time of purchase...they would be great to see because all the photos we've seen on this thread are at least 10 years after the fact and pine trees can grow awful fast in 10 years...

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I'll have a good pic of those giant trees up later tonite once I get home.

[JESII]

Thanks Mike.


Tom,

Have you looked into Crump land ownership near Browns Mills ever? Seems a more likely place for the unting trip to me...

[Tom MacWood]

Joe
All things considered I don't think this bogus story is such a big deal, especially in comparison to the other bogus local tales....like Wilson's trip abroad in 1910, Crump losing his life due to a tooth ache, etc.

  What was his cause of death?

  Anthony

Crump did make a trip to Europe in 1910, but Wilson did not, and GC died from a self inflicted gun shot.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

The train story doesn't pass your smell test because it's unreasonable to believe he first spotted the site in 1910 when he had been past it several times before?

Why is the hunting story more logical on that basis? What difference does it make how many other sites he/they considered?


Pat,

How 'bout those 40 foot trees? You claim to have photos from the time of purchase...they would be great to see because all the photos we've seen on this thread are at least 10 years after the fact and pine trees can grow awful fast in 10 years...

I don't know about the smell test but, it doesn't pass the reasonableness test IMO for the reasons I stated, and everyone not named Tillinghast who did share their interpretation of how it happened told a much different but consistent story.

[JESII]

It's more reasonable that he may have hunted there than to believe he saw it from a train that we know he rode scores of times at a minimum...how so?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

The person who scanned the pic for me cut off the top part...I'll have to try again tomorrow.

I promise it will be revealing.

[JSlonis]

Tom,

Would you agree that Crump was an avid golfer?  Are you trying to tell me that during 1910, the year he took a 3 month trip to Europe to play golf and travel, he DIDN'T play a round of golf in the Philly area that year?  C'mon! 

It appears you are running out of outlandish claims, but if that's the ship you want to go down with, so be it.  I'm not sailing with you.

[Mike Cirba]

In the meantime, I took this somewhat inspired photo tonight from the town I was visiting for dinner.

I think here's clear, definitive proof of Patrick's contention that a rider in a passenger train wouldn't be able to notice a damn thing about the physical characteristics of the property passing a site with over 100 feet of elevation change provide there were a lot of trees on the site.    

Glad he was able to prove all of us wrong.  

[Mike Cirba]

AW Tiliinghast wrote the story of the train in three separate publications in Jan/Feb 1913, two national and one local to Philadelphia.

He was close friends with Crump until Crump's death in early 1918.   One would think that if Tilly was lying or mistaken in his story that George Crump would have corrected him and asked him to set the record straight.

Instead, despite the close friendship, and despite beyond moved beyond words at Crump's untimely passing, Tillinghast wrote the following in Golf Illustrated in May of 1933.

IN last month's installment of these recollections nl mine,
there was related the story of the "Birth of the Birdie,"
which took place during one of the regular week-end pilgrimages
of a little band of Philadelphia golfers. The name
of one of these pilgrims was mentioned, that of the late George
A, Crump, one of my dearest old friends and one of the rarest,
most lovable men I have ever known, His contribution to golf
was so great, that certainly it deserves a chapter alone, a chapter,
which I fear may be not entirely adequate.

I have told of our winter habit of taking train from Camden
for the hour's run to Northfield. George Crump invariably
was of the party and on several occasions
I observed him looking intently
from the train window as we
passed through a section about
twenty miles out. As a matter of
fact his attention had been attracted
by a freakish bit of country in South
Jersey, freakish because it was so
totally different from the monotonous
flat lands of those parts. At first
he said nothing to any one, but
quietly, as was his wont in everything
he did, he visited the tract and
took option on one hundred and
eighty acres of gently-hilled, pinecovered,
sandy land—the tract which
he had so intently studied from the
passing trains.

Then he told a few of us of a plan,
which he had in mind. This was in
1912, and at that time the Philadelphia
district really possessed no
course of true championship requirements.
The best golfers of that district
bemoaned the fact that their
play was over courses that were not
sufficiently exacting to develop their
strokes to such high standard as to
make them serious factors in the national events.

George Crump's dream ,
was to build a course, which would
offer a great diversity of play in
really exacting form, a course that
would have no single hole designed
with the limitations of the ordinary player in mind. He contended
that each club in Philadelphia had enough class players,
who could cope with such a super-course, to insure an ample
membership. With his own money he purchased the property
and entirely financed the work.

But, above all, his own ideals entirely dominated the plan and this truly
great course must ever remain, a lasting, glorious monument to his genius. True,
he sought opinions from others.

I was one of the first to walk the property with him and that
George Crump finally incorporated two of my conceptions entirely (the long seventh and
the thirteenth) will ever be the source of great satisfaction. He
also had opinions on various points from Walter Travis and
C. B. Macclonald. also from many others of his friends, who,
as amateurs, were capable of offering valuable suggestions because
they were numbered among the great players of the
country at that time.

In January of 1913, George Crump gave me permission to
publish in my syndicated weekly golf column of that period, the
first word cif [he new course. An excerpt from this read: "The
Philadelphia section is to have a great golf course—one which
may eclipse all others. Although I have known of the plans
for more than a year, only recently have I been relieved from
secrecy and the announcement appears in print today for the
first time. Mr. Crump's first thought was to provide winter
golf, but I predict that it will attract the cream of players
throughout the entire year."

In March, 1913, I published a full description of work already
accomplished and described in
detail the first four holes, which had
been completed entirely to George
Crump's own plan and personally
directed building, and also the plan of
the first nine -holes and the tenth and
eighteenth, all of which remained as
George determined with the exception
of the ninth.

In May it was announced that the British golf
archiitect, H. S. Colt, was in Canada and
that probably he would visit Pine
Valley to collaborate in the final
drafting of plans, which he did during
the following month, June, and
most excellently. So it will be seen,
by all this, exactly how Pine Valley
was conceived, and how it developed.

In some respects the course represents
a concensus of opinion, carefullv
edited by the master mind of George
Crump, to whom must be given credit
to the fullest measure. Certainly one
of the world's greatest golf courses,
it reflects the genius of one man
after all and must ever be a tribute
to his memory. For George Crump
was not destined to live to see his
great masterpiece entirely completed.
That is the tragedy of it all.  Yet it
was a fortunate thing that he did
live long enough to hear Pine Valley's
praises from the lips and hearts
of the truly great in golf, but I know
that the praise from his close friends and boon companions of
the links brought him even greater delight.

His sudden death might have been even more unfortunate
than his passing, for he left no will to provide for the actual
completion, of his work or of its passing to a regular organization,
an eventuality, which he had always contemplated in absolutely
an unselfish way and without the remotest thought of
any profit to himself, although the project had rendered the
property exceedingly valuable. However, most fortunately
for the game of golf, his family, knowing well his unrecorded
intentions, made possible the turning over of Pine Valley to the
present club, as he would have had it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

In the meantime, I took this somewhat inspired photo tonight from the town I was visiting for dinner.

I think here's clear, definitive proof of Patrick's contention that a rider in a passenger train wouldn't be able to notice a damn thing about the physical characteristics of the property passing a site with over 100 feet of elevation change provide there were a lot of trees on the site.    

Glad he was able to prove all of us wrong.  

Mike,

Your photo, not taken from the train, but a distance from the train proves my point.

If you'll look closely, you'll see that the first stand of trees obstructs the view of the trees in the backround, the trees on the ascending elevation.

Your picture, and your conclusion are erroneous and disengenuous, since you didn't show a photo from the train, but rather a photo some distance from the train. 
 
In addition, you deliberately chose a steep elevation unlike any elevation immediately adjacent to the tracks at PV.
That's intellectually dishonest.

I've admonished you in the past for these types of misrepresentations, but obviously, you can't help  yourself.
You've personified the phrase, "Desperate men do desperate things" and that's unfortunate since it erodes your credibility.

[Patrick_Mucci]

All,

You can see the height of the trees on the other side of the tracks in the two pictures Paul Turner posted previously, and 40 feet might be accurate if you put 2 or 3 atop each other.  

You don't have to look across the tracks, just look at the height of the trees in front of the 18th tee.
They're at least 40' high.

Plus, as Paul mentioned, the track is elevated above the surrounds approximately 10 feet.   Add another 7-8 feet that a passenger would be elevated and it's clear that there are a number of places around the property where a rider would be looking DOWN onto the property.

Mike, you're a victim of your own photo.
Just look at the tracks, then look north of the tracks.
A passenger in a train couldn't see a thing past that dense forest.
Wouldn't matter if they were looking straight ahead, up or down, those trees and the jungle like undergrowth that Simon Carr described would prevent any visuals of the property.

Further, if Crump was traveling during winter to Atlantic City (which he was)  all of the deciduous tree leaves and undergrowth would be GONE, as is evident in the picture of the 17th below.   Ask Joe Bausch about the difference walking Cobbs Creek in the winter versus the summer and what you can see on the property.

Except for the fact that the forest is predominantly pine trees.
Hint:  That's why they called it "PINE VALLEY"

This is all very funny and ironic.   In the case of NGLA, despite CBM's description to the contrary, Patrick tells us that CBM and Whigham were able to completely route the course in a day or two on horseback over what CBM tells us was an overgrown, forbidden site they could only navigate on horseback.

Mike, you're lying, once again.
Macdonald NEVER described the site as "forbidden".  That's your disengenuous attempt to distort the facts.
And, as you stated, the site was almost treeless, with bushes and berry bushes populating the site.
Please, when you're trying to make a point, don't distort or fabricate.

Here, he argues that you couldn't even SEE the undulations of the surrounds enough to interest Crump from the tracks, first because the train was moving too fast.   When it was pointed out to Patrick that there were two train stations within 1.4 miles of each other along this section, one right off today's 1st fairway, suddenly the issue became the growth.    

Again, you're forced to lie in order to try to make your point.
From the begining I indicated that the land immediately adjacent to the tracks was dense woods.
Simon Carr expanded upon that, indicating that the underbrush was so thick it resembled a jungle.

As to the train, you indicated that one station was for commercial/industrial stops.
I believe I indicated that the land bordering the tracks was less than 4,000 feet.
At 60 mph, that would give one 48 seconds of viewing time.
At 30 mph, 96 seconds of viewing time.
However short the time of viewing, Simon Carr's description of the land, along with contemporaneous photos, reveal it to be inpenetrable to the naked eye from the tracks.

Again, look at the picture you posted below and tell me what can be seen north of the tracks through the woods.
NOTHING.  Ditto the south side prior to clearing.

I have no doubt that sections had a lot of underbrush, but it's funny that some people don't see this for what it is...another transparent attempt to argue meaninglessly about a course that Tom Paul is connected to in a transparent effort to goad him back to this site.

Mike, in addition to your acting stupid and making dumb, unsubstantiated statements, intentionally or unintentionally, NONE of my posts are intended to goad TEPaul and NONE of my posts are to goad TEPaul into returning to this site.

He's also completely full of crap.

I think I've presented facts, physical and logical, whereas you've presented newspaper articles which we know are notoriously flawed.
You even said so yourself.

Just look at the picture below and see how dense the forest is by the railroad tracks.
Look at how tall those trees are and look at how tall the trees in front of the 18th tee are.
They're 40+ feet.

They all prove my point.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

I agree a combo would be best for most people.  And while a novice, it isn't that hard to learn to read a topo map.

I agree, I think it would be easier to learn how to read a topo map than be imbued with the talent/skill to route and design a course on raw land dense with forest and jungle like underbrush, especially for a novice.

And GAC was a novice.
He hadn't spent years abroad studying the great courses and holes as CBM did.
Hence, I can't imagine him routing the course vis a vis field trips.

I recall a  science excersise in about third grade where they tried to teach us that concept by building a clay landform in a plastic box, filling it with water to 1" levels, and tracing the topos.  Again, as a freshman in LA school, it was easy enough to learn, to.  Who knows, maybe Crump asked his surveyors for a quick lesson.

I would imagine, if he was going to purchase land, that he would have had the boundaries and maybe more surveyed.
And, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that he retained those surveyors.

And, if it was as dense as you say it was, when you walk the woods, you usually keep your eyes down, looking for logs you may trip over, or snakes.  That said, I have never seen a property without at least a few paths cut through it to get me to basic locations.

Jeff, I'm not saying it, I'm just repeating Simon Carr's contemporaneous description of the property..
In addition, contemporaneous ground and aerial photos confirm Simon Carr's description.

So, yes, some kind of combo I believe.  As to exactly what proportion, we can never be sure.  And for that matter, it wouldn't surprise me if it varied over the course of the long routing process, from walks early until he learned the topo, to topo in main planning, to more on site visits later to refine.  As Ian says, as the process goes on, its more and more what you see on the ground that shapes the final tweaks.


Jeff, you forget and have to be reminded, you and Ian and others are skilled architects who have been doing this for years.
GAC was a pure novice at this pursuit, a beginner absent your skills and experience, so conceptualizing the course from walks seems like an enormous stretch, especially in a hostile environment.  That's why I believe that PV may have been more of a product of topos than walk throughs, whereas, a course like Hidden Creek, also tree and underbrush covered, appears to be a product of walk throughs.

At least, that has been my experience.

Agree, but rememer, GAC didn't have that experience.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

You're going to have to substantiate your claim that the property was covered with a dense forest of 40+ foot tall pine trees. One of the courses long time residents thinks there was a forest fire across the whole area 15 - 20 years prior to Crump finding the site.

Jim, I can see that the kids are depriving you of sleep again.

You want me to substantiate something, but you're prepared to take a fourth party's reliance on a third party who "thinks" there may have been a forest fire in the area.

Do me a favor, look at the picture below and let me know if the trees north of the RR tracks look like they've been impaired by a forest fire.

Then, look at aerial photos from the early 20's and teens.  In particular look at the forested areas between holes and surrounding the property.
Do those trees/forests look like their growth was impaired by a forest fire ?

You have a decision, do you want to believe your own eyes and the photos, or TEPaul's "Uncle Remus" story about a phantom forest fire that confined itself to the land immediately adjacent to the RR tracks ?

Get some sleep and call me in the morning.

[Bryan Izatt]

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



Further, if Crump was traveling during winter to Atlantic City (which he was)  all of the deciduous tree leaves and undergrowth would be GONE, as is evident in the picture of the 17th below.   Ask Joe Bausch about the difference walking Cobbs Creek in the winter versus the summer and what you can see on the property.

Except for the fact that the forest is predominantly pine trees.
Hint:  That's why they called it "PINE VALLEY"

Below are two aerials - one from August 2005 and the second from April 2010.  The forest NE of the tracks is dense in 2005.  In 2010, not so much.  Because, in April 2010 the deciduous trees are not in leaf yet.  Sure looks like that forest is primarily deciduous.





Some additional insight into the vegetation in that area from the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

"Frequent and severe fires and man's repeated cutting are also of outstanding importance to the vegetation's composition and distribution. No large area in the region has escaped burning and/or cutting within the past century. At least until the early 1900's, most forests in the Pine Barrens were clear-cut every 25 to 50 years for firewood, charcoal production, poles and lumber. Most of the forests were burned repeatedly, at intervals of 10 years or less to 30 years or more. These frequent fires apparently screened out many plants which grow along the margins, being predominant in surrounding regions. The absence of these potential competitors and/or the stimulation afforded by the fires may have favored many existing Pine Barrens plants that are absent or rare elsewhere."


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



When was this photo taken?  How many feet would the trees have grown between 1910 and the year of this photo?  The trees in front of the tee appear significantly larger than those on the other side of the tracks.  Do you suppose the trees were all of uniform height? All 40 feet?

[Tom MacWood]

Thanks Mike.


Tom,

Have you looked into Crump land ownership near Browns Mills ever? Seems a more likely place for the unting trip to me...

Jim
If you have four different contemporaneous individuals saying he hunted at the present site why is Browns Mills more likely, other than the fact you want it to be more likely?

[Tom MacWood]

It's more reasonable that he may have hunted there than to believe he saw it from a train that we know he rode scores of times at a minimum...how so?

Crump made scores of trips by the site in the company of Tilly, and presumably looked out the train window on every trip, but we are to believe the inebriated Tilly recalls one particular time when he was looking out the window in 1910, despite the fact that Crump apparently wasn't playing golf in 1910 or going on any golf excursions in 1910?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Would you agree that Crump was an avid golfer?  Are you trying to tell me that during 1910, the year he took a 3 month trip to Europe to play golf and travel, he DIDN'T play a round of golf in the Philly area that year?  C'mon!  

It appears you are running out of outlandish claims, but if that's the ship you want to go down with, so be it.  I'm not sailing with you.

Yes, I would characterize him as an avid golfer, and that is exactly what I'm telling you. He did not appear in any of the major or even smaller local events in 1910, like his own club championship (events in which he was normally a regular fixture), or any national events or AC events that he normally participated in. He was one of a handful of the top golfers in the area, and when he did not play it was a big deal, and that is why it was reported he was away from the game in 1910. And it wasn't the first time he taken an extended break from the game. When his wife died in 1907 he took a good year and half off, and that was reported as well. He sold his hotel in August 1910, and left for the UK in September. The hotel situation had been dragging on in the courts for a good year...there was some dispute about who actually owned the hotel, and it is complicated story that involved his late uncle's estate. And its not a claim, it is a documented fact.

[Tom MacWood]

That photo was taken by Strohmeyer, probably in 1915 or 1916, but that is immaterial. The 1910 train story is bogus. Crump and Tilly were not making golf trips to AC in 1910.

[Mike Cirba]

Goodness gracious.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Further, if Crump was traveling during winter to Atlantic City (which he was)  all of the deciduous tree leaves and undergrowth would be GONE, as is evident in the picture of the 17th below.

The picture below was taken AFTER the land was cleared, in 1917, not prior to 1910.  

Ask Joe Bausch about the difference walking Cobbs Creek in the winter versus the summer and what you can see on the property.

Cobb's Creek isn't in the Pine Barrens, Pine Valley is.

Except for the fact that the forest is predominantly pine trees.
Hint:  That's why they called it "PINE VALLEY"

Below are two aerials - one from August 2005 and the second from April 2010.  The forest NE of the tracks is dense in 2005.  In 2010, not so much.  Because, in April 2010 the deciduous trees are not in leaf yet.  Sure looks like that forest is primarily deciduous.


100 years after the fact, it might be.
But, look closely at the trees that border the tracks.
They're pines.






Some additional insight into the vegetation in that area from the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

"Frequent and severe fires and man's repeated cutting are also of outstanding importance to the vegetation's composition and distribution. No large area in the region has escaped burning and/or cutting within the past century. At least until the early 1900's, most forests in the Pine Barrens were clear-cut every 25 to 50 years for firewood, charcoal production, poles and lumber. Most of the forests were burned repeatedly, at intervals of 10 years or less to 30 years or more. These frequent fires apparently screened out many plants which grow along the margins, being predominant in surrounding regions. The absence of these potential competitors and/or the stimulation afforded by the fires may have favored many existing Pine Barrens plants that are absent or rare elsewhere."

With the Pine Barrens comprised of 1,100,000 acres, the above statement is general in nature and not site specific to the 180 acres upon which PV resides.  Simon Carr described the site as it was when Crump came across it, not 100 years later.  He stated that it was 'HEAVILY WOODED WITH UNDERGROWTH AS DENSE AS A JUNGLE"  That doesn't sound like scorched or fire swept land to me.

But, if you, TEPaul and Mike want to fabricate conditions that were contrary to Simon Carr's description of the site conditions, don't let me stop you.
What's amazing to me is how quick you, Mike and Jim Sullivan, are willing to accept, not even a specific recollection, but a vague uncertainty from an individual, a third party, who wasn't even there, that thinks that there might have been a fire, without stating when.  Yet, you refute contemporaneous photographic and eye witness accounts.

Why won't you and Mike and others accept Simon Carr's contemporaneous description.
He was there.  He was as close to GAC and PV as you could get.
And yet, you, Mike and other cretins are disputing him and the photos.  WHY ?
Just because he agrees with me ?  
Or to perpetuate the myth ?

You guys are getting desperate, accepting anything you read, no matter how general it may be, accepting vague, "maybe's" from fourth party sources, phantom recollections as "The Gospel" and disputing contemporaneous photos and eye witness accounts of the actual site.

C'mon, stop the insanity, you're too smart for that.


When was this photo taken?  

1917

How many feet would the trees have grown between 1910 and the year of this photo?

I'd estimate 3-6 feet.

Pitch Pines, the dominant tree in the Pine Barrens grow as tall as 124 feet, with the average height being about 94 feet.
Jersey Pine grows to about 60 feet.  

The trees in front of the tee appear significantly larger than those on the other side of the tracks.  

That's because they're closer to where the camera was and because you're not familiar with the site and its terrain.

Do you suppose the trees were all of uniform height? All 40 feet?

No, I think most were much, much higher.  Those pines grow to 60. 90 and 124 feet.

But, once the trees were 5 or 10 feet taller than the train on the tracks, their incremental height in excess of that point is immaterial, unless Crump had over the horizon radar.

In other words, if the trees were 30 feet tall, and Crump's eye level was at 15 foot mark on the tree, the 10, 20, 30 or more tree growth above the 30 foot level wouldn't have any impact on his ability to see horizontally.  Maybe, if the Empire State building was next to the tracks it would make a difference in what he could see, but, with the elevations south of the tracks being more gradual and significantly less than the Empire State Building, he couldn't see a thing over 30 foot trees.
[/color]

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

A few things in response to your latest diatribe...

First, I rode on the train I pictured a few weeks back.   Not only was it possible to view the topology of surrounding wooded areas, it would have been impossible to miss.   All that is required is a decent setback of the foliage a dozen or so yards from the tracks...which is the case at Pine Valley as well.

Second, I don't know how much you actually read versus just typing argumentative nonsense, but Crump was abroad playing the best courses for 3 months at the end of 1910, prior to purchasing the property of Pine Valley.    Your continued use of the term "novice" does not change that fact, or the fact that Crump was a top amateur golfer for years and well versed with the best courses and minds in the game.

Third, I have no idea what your overall point is, but it sounds like you're still contending that Bill Coore routed Hidden Creek by simply walking around.   I was at the same event that you were and like Jim Sullivan, I think you misunderstood him.

Coore was uncertain whether the pretty flat property where Hidden Creek is located was suitable to build a really good course.  He described how he walked around for a while just looking for little things...a slight rise, a dip, etc  "that looked like golf", and which he might be able to utilize as a feature upon which to build a golf hole.   It sounded to me like he spent a lot of time doing this before actually saying "Yes" to taking on the job.   Essentially, he was trying to determine if the site could produce something he'd be proud of.   Because the site was so flat he spent a great deal of time upfront doing his own due diligence.

Yet, I'd bet dollars to donuts that once he said yes the first thing he did was get a topo map to help him.

This contrasts markedly from the Pine Valley site, which has over 100 feet of elevation change on the property.   The fact is THAT elevation change and THAT sandy soil was obvious from Crump's train ride, and interested him enough to take a closer look.

We know that it's recorded he took multiple trips out there after his initial discovery (probably some of them involving hunting, as well), and then brought some select friends like Tillinghast to see if they saw the same potential.

When they did, and concurred with his initial positive impressions, he bought the property and THEN had the property surveyed, cleared, and topo maps created from which he worked to route and design the golf course.   CB Macdonald did much the same thing at NGLA, although you deny the historical facts and contemporaneous accounts there, as well.

So I really don't understand your overall point at all, and what you're trying to compare and contrast, but essentially they are the same story and same set of processes, with the only difference is that due to the flatness of the site of Hidden Creek, Coore probably had a tougher time being certain of the wisdom of pursuing the site in question than Crump did.

[Dan Herrmann]

Mike,
For what it's worth, that was my recollection of Bill Coore's presentation too.  He did say he didn't use CAD tools, but that doesn't wouldn't preclude picking up a topo map. 

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

So, you are contending that the entire 4,000 foot stretch of track was impenetrably lined with pine trees that were on average 94 feet tall. 

And, that there were no gaps in that wall of trees. 

That there were no deciduous trees in that line of pines. 

I assume that you are not claiming that the jungle-like undergrowth was also 94 feet high. 

BTW, how does undergrowth grow in a dense pine forests in NJ?

And that the PV site had not been logged or subject to fire for 100 years before 1910 so that the trees could get to their average height?



With regard to the picture below, how high is the hill on the left relative to the tracks?  To the base of the pines in the foreground? 

How high is the embankment leading from the pond to the tracks?

What was the setback of the tree line from the tracks in 1910?

Do the pictures that you mentioned in your initial post show the pre-construction lay of the land?  Have you been able to get a picture of them or scan them yet so we could post them.  They would be helpful in persuading me and others.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()