Pine Valley and Topos

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

I agree that article ONLY mean they were not regulars in local events that they usually played.

For that matter, no where in the article does it say Tillie was in the train with Crump.  Also, Tillie later writes that Crump did keep the site a secret for a while, which according to Tillie was his way.  Not sure why, but its possible that since they were focused on the lakefront sites for more winter golf, Crump simply wanted to scour the site very well first to be convinced that it would make such a better golf course so as to change the minds of the rest of the group.

Pure speculation on my part, but I never really understood the logic of TMac that the story made no sense, given he was looking at other sites first.  No reason on earth that he wasn't canvassing many sites at once.

[JESII]

Jeff, Do you remember the last time you bought a really cool tartan blazer thinking it was unique and the next time you went to a party there were 50 of them there?

I think that kind of subconcious observation is prevalent in all things....buying a certain car, wearing certain shoes...if you fairly recently took on the idea of finding a place to build a golf course (when it had never occurred to you before), all of the sudden good looking site appear in places you've been by many time before.

There's probably a scientific word for it...

[Jeff_Brauer]

I barely recall buying my first Tartan blazer, but do recall having to buy a new one when the first one....ah....shrunk.   There is probably a scientific name for THAT too.

But yes, its like hearing a word, and then hearing it a lot more after you first hear it or understand what it means.  The only exception I have ever known to that rule of thumb is that apparently, Fazio never grasped the meaning of "budget" even after hearing it (sometimes screamed by owners in his ear).

[JMEvensky]

But yes, its like hearing a word, and then hearing it a lot more after you first hear it or understand what it means.  The only exception I have ever known to that rule of thumb is that apparently, Fazio never grasped the meaning of "budget" even after hearing it (sometimes screamed by owners in his ear).

I bet a lot of people would pay real money to hear you expand on that one.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Just a joke, of course.  One year I did my Carnac impression and did this A and Q for TF's benefit:

A.  Large City, Medium Sized County, Small third world nation.
Q. Name three things with smaller budgets than a Fazio course.

In reality, contractors tell me that they do a nice job of estimating work quantities and staying within those.  I have heard the landscape budget gets out of control sometimes, at least in the hey day.  There are some complaints about reshaping finished features.

Last time I talked with Tom Marzolf, we had a nice discussion about how he keeps renovation projects manageble for their clients by breaking it into smaller chunks over many years, focusing on what is good for them vs what is good for Fazio.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"It could be that, in tramping through the grounds, he saw more of the trees and shrubs than the forest and perhaps only realized the rolling nature and its possibilities when he saw it at a greater distance from the train.  In any case, he found a great location for the building of a golf course, no matter how." - Omitted from Patrick Mucci's account of Warner Shelly

Patrick,

Didn't they teach you in Catholic school that a lie of omission, no matter how much you try to obfuscate and backtrack and divert, is still a lie?

There is NO lie of omission.
I stated what Shelly stated was fact, not what he speculated.

Why deny it?   Why rationalize it?  Be a man and fess up to the fact that you thought nobody else here would have the Shelley book so you could get away with failing to tell us that Shelley wrote that he wasn't sure about when Crump discovered the land as ideal for golf, but instead conceded that it could have been by train.

Mike,

You continue to make foolish, irresponsible statements, statements absent an iota of fact.
I was aware that others had Shelly's book for several reasons, one of which is that others on this site who possessed the book, or knew how to get copies, helped me get my copy.  Why do you make up lies ?  Why do you make false statements without knowing the facts.

You should also know that I'm attempting to obtain another book written about Pine Valley, but am having a difficult time locating a copy.

But you didn't trust your reader enough to tell us that, did you?   No, instead you hid that information knowingly, willingly, and purposefully.
Now the person who has consistently misrepresented the facts and deliberately lied is telling us that I hid information ? ? ?
I hid nothing, I quoted what Shelly stated was fact.  Not what he speculated.  Speculation is worthless, facts are invaluable.
But, you prefer speculation to facts when the facts don't support your position.
I think everyone sees that.

You lied and you got caught with your pants down.  

Would you cite, with specificity, where I lied ?

You didn't want people to know that Shelley tells us himself that he's speculating.   You portrayed it to everyone as some smoking gun when you KNEW differently and you got burned instead.   Get over it and improve your behavior here.

You're ridiculous.
I reported what Shelly stated was factual.
Being intellectually honest doesn't require me to report what he admitted was speculation.
Your attempt to deflect the fact that the train story is a romantic myth is pathetic.

I've also asked what evidence Shelley provides that the picture was taken at the Pine Valley location?
The evidence is clear.
Shelly stated that the photo was taken on the property that would become Pine Valley in 1909.
Shelly includes that photo immediately after making that statement.
Case closed.

You on the other hand continue to foolishly post, on a repetitive basis, the same newspaper articles.
You previously admitted that newspaper articles are not always accurate.
You seem to only believe them when they suit your position, attacking them when they don't.
What a joke  

I've seen two different pictures of Crump hunting in the woods and they aren't definitive by any stretch.     As others have pointed out, they could be from anywhere.

NOT ACCORDING TO SHELLY

Pine Valley is 12.5 miles from Crump's home as the crow flies.   Even today, there is no quick and easy way to get there as there, as MapQuest estimates a 27 minute ride by car.   Yet, you'd have everyone believe that the land for the course was virtually in his backyard.
It was, it was just down the road, off the White Horse Pike, or, even better yet, according to you, it was just a few minutes by train, which would let him off at the Sumner stop

And, if you don't even know at this point when Harry Colt first came to Pine Valley, then you haven't even been intellectually curious enough on this topic to read Tillinghast's direct accounts.  

Ask Bob Huntley about my habit of asking questions.

Other than fabricating history and floating a lot of misinformation and ungrounded assertions around, what exactly is your purpose in participating on these historical threads...especially since you don't seem to have the intellectual curiosity to bother even reading the materials that have been presented?

Again, would you cite exxactly what I fabricated ?
You continue to make false accusations, but, you never seem to be able to back them up when challenged.

Shelly stated, unequivically, that the train story was a newspaper driven myth, that GAC was familar with the land years and years before it was considered for a golf course

Tom MacWood,

Jim Finegan is still alive.   If you want to know the source of the postcard, why don't you ask him?

As far as Shelley, his supposed proof is a photo of George Crump in 1909 hunting in the woods.   If Crump had known about the land from hunting back then, why did he wait until the fall of 1912 to tell his friends that he had "landed on something pretty fine"?

No one knows when this was first discussed, but we do know that Crump took Howard Perrin out on the property for the first time in the summer of 1912.   We know Tillinghast told us in early 1913 that he was one of the first people Crump took out on the property and that he'd known of Crump's plans for over a year.   We know that Crump bought the property in October 1912 after considering it and studying it for some time.   So, there is no way that the initial meeting to discuss this idea of building an Uber course happened in the fall of 1912, as Shelley misinterpreted.

Shelly didn't misrepresent anything.

Howard Perrin's solicitation letter regarding the formation and building of the course was sent out on 04-01-13.
Perrin's letter states that GAC had bought 184 acres and that construction would begin in the spring of 1913 with a planned completion date of the fall of 2014.  He further goes on to state that 18 men have already committed to investing $ 1,000 apiece.  In all probabiltiy, it was the meeting of those 18 men that Shelly reported took place in the fall of 1912.  Shortly after that meeting GAC wrote that he had found the land.  He then purchased it.
Shelly's account is not in conflict with the facts as you disengenuously state.

If he didn't know that, he was either missing important contemporaneous information, or he misinterpreted what he had, probably based on his reading of Father Carr's 1915 report.

Maybe you're misinterpreting the facts to suit your agenda.
Namely, discredit Shelly, and revitalize the train myth.
You're so obvious it's comical

Archie,

About how old would Shelley have been in 1918 when Mr. Crump passed away?   I know he wrote his book in 1982.   Thanks!


Shelly first played Pine Valley in 1925.

 

[JESII]

Pat (and/or Tom),

When do you think the referenced train ride was or would have been? With some degree of specificity please.

[Tom MacWood]

No one knows when this was first discussed, but we do know that Crump took Howard Perrin out on the property for the first time in the summer of 1912.   We know Tillinghast told us in early 1913 that he was one of the first people Crump took out on the property and that he'd known of Crump's plans for over a year.   We know that Crump bought the property in October 1912 after considering it and studying it for some time.   So, there is no way that the initial meeting to discuss this idea of building an Uber course happened in the fall of 1912, as Shelley misinterpreted.

When did Perrin first visit the site? Late summer 1912? The last day of summer is September 23. I'm not sure I would characterize Joe E. Ford's 1925 article as an important internal document, but whatever the case late summer or early fall, there is not much difference in my mind. By the way Ford also said Crump was familiar with the site through hunting...so add him to the growing list. You have obviously chosen to ignore that part of his article.

Tilly claimed a lot of things. After reading his report in 1/1913 one would get the impression he had some exclusive story. The project had already been reported in the Inquirer the year before. And talking about a project for a year and formally meeting are two different things. I don't think Tilly's article sheds any light on when they formally met. Would you agree?

I think he actually purchased the property in November from the Lumberton Sand Co. At least that is what was reported in the Inquirer. And how do you know he had been studying it for sometime?

You said you had proof Shelley was wrong; I don't think you have the slightest idea when the meeting took place.

[Tom MacWood]

Pat (and/or Tom),

When do you think the referenced train ride was or would have been? With some degree of specificity please.

I think they made numerous train rides over period of ten+ years. I have no idea on which of those train rides Crump was looking out the train window, and on which rides he refused to look out the window.

[JESII]

Good. Then you agree that the site of that terrain would have been eye catching, whenever it was.

[Tom MacWood]

Huh? It must not have been that eye catching if he was looking elsewhere - Browns Mills & Absecon.

[JESII]

OK! Let's call it "moderately eye-catching". Does that work for you?

[Mike Cirba]

I think it should be obvious by now that this entire thread is pointless.

As JMEvensky pointed out very wisely, this is not a thread attempting to find the truth, but an effort to obfuscate and hide the truth behind bluster and baseless speculation.

It is farcial, and it's encouraging to see that everyone here seems to have caught onto the game pretty quickly this time.

Either that or Pat and Tom are purposefully trying to do the worst sales job in history, sort of like the "Springtime for Hitler" for golf course aficionados.        

How else would one explain this train wreck, pun fully intended?  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

And we're still here because........?

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

I think it's because we are genuinely interested in the topics being discussed, enjoy seeing any unearthed or relevant artifacts, and enjoy trying to understand legitimate open questions, which this discussion clearly has very little of.

Either that or strong personal masochistic tendencies coupled with an overly sensitive sense of fairness and justice.

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike and Pat,

I haven't seen either of you post the Crump in the forest picture. Or, Pat, the other photos of the site pre-construction.  I, for one, would really like to see it one or all.

Mike, I know you know how to post it.  Can you?

Pat, I know you don't know how to post it, so I'd do it for you.  You said in the Bayonne thread that you could take pictures with your cell phone and e-mail them.  Why don't you take a picture of the picture with your cell phone and e-mail it to me directly from your phone?  I can then post it.

[Mike Cirba]

Bryan,

Remarkably through the powers of the Internet I now have a copy of the Shelly book.

I'll provide pre-construction photos as well as the pic of Crump sitting in the woods later today.

I've skimmed it and have yet to find any evidence or claim by Shelly to indicate either that;

1) Shelly ever met Crump in person

and

2) Any evidence indicating what he bases his statement on that the woods photo was from 1909 and taken at Pine Valley.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I think it's because we are genuinely interested in the topics being discussed, enjoy seeing any unearthed or relevant artifacts, and enjoy trying to understand legitimate open questions, which this discussion clearly has very little of.

Either that or strong personal masochistic tendencies coupled with an overly sensitive sense of fairness and justice.

Mike,

I don't see how your staunch defense of an unsubstantiated myth, one that Shelly demolishes, is in the spirit of unearthing relevant information.
I don't see how your rejection of Shelly's words and the 1909 photo he posted showing Crump on the grounds of what would become Pine Valley is in the spirit of unearthing relevant information.

You have attempted to reject any and all facts, arguments and reasoning that departs from the myth.

Shelly demolished the myth when he stated that there was PROOF to the contrary.
Shelly demolished the myth when he stated that the 1909 photo of Crump on the PV property was "testimony of that fact"

You can't have it both ways.

You can't say that you embrace any and all relevant information, when you reject any and all information if it disagrees with your stated position.

[JESII]

Pat,

How do you know the picture was on the property?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

How do you know the picture was on the property?

Because Shelly, a most reliable, honest source, told us so.

Why don't you question the newspaper articles with respect to their veracity ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

Thanks...the funny thing is that it shows exactly what everyone said back then...that the area had wide open spaces with long views, as well as areas of dense, low growth as can be seen in the foreground and along the right side of the photograph.   There was also a fair amount of swampland in the lower elevations closer to the bays.  

CBM told us that most of the land he chose was a mix of dense thickets of bushy growth on sand and low-lying swampy areas that was accessible only on horseback.   I'm not sure why some chose not to believe him?

I'm also thinking that he was originally looking at all of the land of Sebonac Neck, which was over 450 acres and included today's Sebonack Golf Club which is at a higher elevation.   I'd guess that one could view the Atlantic from some of the higher spots of that property with such open long views as the picture shows.

After all, that is the Atlantic Ocean out to the right of the photo, yes?

Mike,

I'm quoting this so that you can't edit it any further.

You may want to reread it in the context of what you claimed in your emails

[JESII]

Pat,

How do you know the picture was on the property?

Because Shelly, a most reliable, honest source, told us so.

Why don't you question the newspaper articles with respect to their veracity ?

Pat,

I think what Shelly said is probably 100% accurate, from start to finish...and Tillinghast too!

Walking a parcel of land, with hunting birds as the sole purpose, reveals a very limited perspective of what you could judge as to its overall prospects for golf. You're making that exact argument in this very thread with regards to Crumps time looking at topos versus walking the land to determine a routing. Riding the train and looking across the lakes and swamps that border the tracks would reveal a striking landscape for southern New Jersey. Viewing a large hill from the distance in this example would, at a bare minimum, pique the interest of a guy who has recently began creating a golf course in the area.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think what Shelly said is probably 100% accurate, from start to finish...and Tillinghast too!

Walking a parcel of land, with hunting birds as the sole purpose, reveals a very limited perspective of what you could judge as to its overall prospects for golf.

Agreed, you tend to focus on the reason/s you decided to go afield.
Not that you couldn't have something reveal itself to you, but, your focus, your perspective would be in another arena.

You're making that exact argument in this very thread with regards to Crumps time looking at topos versus walking the land to determine a routing.

Not really, there are differences, bold and nuanced.

 
Riding the train and looking across the lakes and swamps that border the tracks would reveal a striking landscape for southern New Jersey.
So, it's your opinion that he was glued to the window for all of his trips, southward on the Eastbound trips and Southward on the northbound trips and that of the 319,000 feet between Camden and AC, that he spotted less than 4,000 feet that caught his eye.

Shelly told us that he was familiar with the site prior to his train rides.
He lived only a few miles away and frequently hunted on the property.
Why claim that the property only got his attention from a moving railway car.

Viewing a large hill from the distance in this example would, at a bare minimum, pique the interest of a guy who has recently began creating a golf course in the area.

Jim, please look at the 1917 photo and the extent of the dense forest adjacent to the tracks to the north of the tracks.

Tell me what you can see, 50 feet into that forest.
Yet, we know there's a hill there, rising up to 150' ASL.
The Ireland family home was on that hill.
Just look at the trees left of the 18th fairway, down by the water, what can you see through them ?
Why do you grant unencombered visibility to train riders when the photos tell a different story, a story confirmed by Simon Carr, Crump's closest friend and confidant ?

What I'd like you to do the next time you're at PV is walk the tracks, from behind the 2nd green to behind the 14th green, and tell me how far your vision penetrates into the golf course and where.  Now, pretend that you're not walking, but, riding in a speeding train, and for how long those fleeting glimpses would last.

But, all of this is irrelevant.
Shelly has told us, in firm, uncertain terms, that Crump was intimately familiar with the land for years before it was considered for a golf course.

Like Wilson sailing to the UK before 1912, some myths just die harder than others.

How are the kids ?

[Mike Cirba]

Ok, since Patrick seems to be hiding the evidence...

By popular demand, here's his supposed "Smoking Gun" that "demolishes" Tillinghast's contemporaneous account of his close friend's George Crump's story on how he found the land.

Remember that Shelly, 1) Never met Crump, 2) Apparently never spoke to Tillinghast, 3) Wasn't a member until 10 years after Crump's death, 3) Wrote his book in 1982, a full 64 years after Crump's death.

And here's what he said, directly from the book in question.   You'll recognize the first part of the paragraph.

Patrick chose to hide the last two sentences because he didn't want everyone here to know that his supposed moking gun was a water pistol, which even Shelly conceded was only a theory on his part;



And...here's the proof that Crump found the property hunting in the woods.   There is no text that explains anything about the photo than what is offered;




And, here's the pre-construction photos that Patrick originally told us included 40-70 foot tall trees, impenetrable underbrush making the property invisible from the elevated train rails.




Here's one of the clearing of the third hole...as you can see in the second photo after the hole was built, no trees were touched in the area behind the green, so in the winter one can clearly see from ground level all of the sandy undulations beyond through the mostly deciduous trees.

[JESII]

The kids are incredibly lucky to have the mother they do. Thanks for asking.

Being familiar with the land from hunting trips is different than viewing it from a distance in the context of considering it as a landscape to place a golf course...your own golf course. 4,000 feet is what, 3/4 of a mile? TRhat puts a different spin on it, no?

This is quite similar to your argument comparing Crump to Coore in terms of walking a property to try to find a course on it.