News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1300 on: October 01, 2011, 08:28:15 AM »
A bit off topic here - but those aerials have a very similar look to what I saw in the Sandhills region of Nebraska this summer.  Obviously, NJ doesn't have the hills you have in Nebraska, but you can tell quickly that this area of NJ was PERFECT for golf.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1301 on: October 01, 2011, 09:44:27 AM »
Let me interject some reality to the exercise (I've added the November report):

9/1910 - Crump sells the Collonade Hotel

11/1910 - It is reported Simon Carr and Crump have not been able to participate in local events this golf season. Carr was in Europe; Crump's absence was due to business.

10/1910-12/1910 - Crump and Baker go on a golf trip to Europe

1/1911 - It is reported Crump will now be playing more golf, business had occupied his time in 1910 preventing him from playing.

Simon Carr wrote that a dozen friends met to discuss the development of a winter course; Crump is given the responsibility of finding the site. HW Wind claimed that meeting took place in 1912. This is confirmed by JE Ford, who said they began looking for a site in the late summer of 1912.

Carr, Ford and Joseph Baker said Crump first looked near Atlantic City on the coast. According to Baker the site Absecon was rejected because of mosquitos. Baker said the next site he considered was Browns Mills. It is unknown why that site was rejected.

Fall/1912 - Crump writes his friends telling them he believes he has found the site.

10/1912-11/1912 - The site is purchased. They begin clearing thousands of trees that winter.

Based on the known facts of when the project began (1912), what sites were considered prior to the present site, and Crump being away from the game in 1910, the Tilly 1910 train story makes no sense, but then again most of the local myths make no sense.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1302 on: October 01, 2011, 09:52:33 AM »
This thread, an the offine blast emails it spawns, are a embarrasment.

Pat, the four children you frequently chide me about are more mature, rational and reasonable then you. You're the only one on here stating your opinion as though it were fact and you're wrong more often than not. Years ago someone said conversations with you on here are not a conversation, nor even a debate, but an intellectual exercise. I assume the pass/fail measurement of that exercise is how soon the examinee realizes they shoud ignore you the better their score...

As for Mike, and his representations on here about various things, I think he jumps the gun all too often, but never intentionally lies about anyting. I think he gets alot wrong but always because of a passion to move the conversation forward...almost trying to get a point settled and agreed so we can all move to the next step in hopes of an eventual final resolution. I agree that it doesn't actually help get to a finish line, but I don't think he lies about any of it.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1303 on: October 01, 2011, 09:56:43 AM »
I believe we have found the problem...




I'd say that I have at least 30 more years of experience at PV vs Jim Sullivan.



JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1304 on: October 01, 2011, 09:57:55 AM »
Tom Macwood, you said:

"There is not a single report of him playing the game that year prior to leaving the country, and the man was prolific golfer who was constantly in the papers (years before and after)."

I'm curious if you can substantiate this. Please help!


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1305 on: October 01, 2011, 12:56:03 PM »
Jim,

I haven't read a single report of Crump going to the bathroom in that time frame either.  Wow, he must have been constipated!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1306 on: October 01, 2011, 01:10:11 PM »
Jim,

Does what I described as far as the location of the 4th fairway to the left of the road in that 1913 picture make sense to you?

Thanks and good luck. This weekend.G

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1307 on: October 01, 2011, 01:25:00 PM »
Mike

I have a hard time really pinpointing any specific feature. I've made my best guesses and will stand by them until something else comes forward. I also admit to not focussing hard your analysis on the road versus the trees in two pictures separated by nearly 10 years and 180 degrees but will go back and look closer.

I'll ask you this in the meantime...are you placing that sand road to the right of where the fairway was built because there is a macadam road there now? Or is the relation to the trees the key to this analysis?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1308 on: October 01, 2011, 01:34:48 PM »
Jim,

Does what I described as far as the location of the 4th fairway to the left of the road in that 1913 picture make sense to you?



Not sure!

I think you may be putting too much weight on the location of the current macadam road. I don't see why a simple sandy road that had nothig to do with the golf course design would be retained and have a hole built around it. It makes more sense to me that they could have easly scrapped that sandy road in favor of having it somewhere else...like 15 or 20 yards further right...once the course was being designed.

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1309 on: October 01, 2011, 01:42:32 PM »
Jim,

Three things..

1. The fact the the ridgeline right of the road as one goes up the hill on 4 was shorn of trees and replanted by the 1920 photo.

2. The big tree left of the 4th fairway coming up the hill in both photos.

3.  The fact that the 3rd tee isn't visible in the Shelly book but is in the Brown book.  It's location as you know is right at the edge of what was cleared.

Take note as well to the way that road wraps around in the 1920 photo just like today.

Thanks.

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1310 on: October 01, 2011, 01:46:35 PM »
Jim,

It helps to look at the 1920 photo at about 200 pct. Resolution and the 1913 one at about 150 pct.

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1311 on: October 01, 2011, 01:56:28 PM »
Jim,

One other thing, sorry.

Note that at the top of the hill in the 1913 photo the road splits left and right in a Y.

It appears the left route was abandoned later to fairway while the right contined down to the clubhouse as it does today.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1312 on: October 01, 2011, 02:41:55 PM »
Yes Mike, if one believes that the sand road in the 1913 picture is in the exact same bed as the macadam road of today then yes, your last comment is irrefutable...


Mike,

Look at the 3rd tee in the 1920 photo - why is the area immediately right of it cleared? There's a small area (~20X30 yard) that stands out...but what in the world is the point?

Where in the 1920 photo does the road wrap around just like today?

I'm in disbelief that these photos are the subject of 10 pages of debate. Surely anyone looking to make factual pronouncements based on them is straining to make their point... 

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1313 on: October 01, 2011, 10:45:18 PM »
Wow, that sure was a short month!  
________________________________________________

Bryan,  I still don't understand why you are going on about the height of the trees.  Last I was measured I was  around 6' 3" and from that height I find it rather difficult of for me to see over the top of anything close to 6' tall and taller.  Whether the trees were 20 feet or 200 feet, they were plenty tall enough to block the view, provided the coverage was thick enough.  Some seem to think these these Philly guys were larger than life, but I doubt that even George Crump was 40 feet tall.
______________________________________________

Jim,

I appreciate your comments about Mike above, but would suggest that you aren't quite acknowledging the bigger picture.

I agree that Mike is passionate, and I agree that he is probably not trying to be intentionally dishonest.  But for these conversations to work we need more than just mindless passion and over exuberance   The parties must possess the willingness and ability to deal with the source material in good faith, and with some minimal attempt at objectivity.  Mike has repeatedly failed on both counts, hasn't he?  

While you may not like it when Patrick comes right out and calls him a liar, Cirba's constant twisting and stretching the source material to suit his argument is not honest, is it?   How about his constant hyperbole about the state of the facts and discussion, and his repeated gross exaggerations regarding everyone else's position?

Just a bit above he wrote, "This myth created and perpetuated here that they were dealing with some Amazonian forest is rather at odds with all the evidence."   Is he being honest there?  Or is he engaged in his usual sarcasm, misrepresentation, and hyperbole to try and misrepresent the views of those with whom he disagrees in an attempt to  advance his point without actually or honestly dealing with the record or the positions of others?  How about his recent about-face on the issue of the state of the land prior to Crump clearing it?  We have multiple reports it was a forest before Crump cleared the land for the course.   But then I posted the oblique from 1931 showing the density of the surrounding woods, Mike simply switched course and began arguing that this all reflected new growth, and that actually the land must have been cleared before Crump found it.    Huh?  Where is there any indication in the source material that the land had already been cleared?  Doesn't it fly in the face of just about everything written at the time?  Don't all the descriptions indicate the opposite?   Mike just made it up, didn't he?   Is this really an honest good faith effort on his part to objective address the arguments and source material? Or is it desperately and disingenuously grasping at anything and everything to try and prop up his position?   Can we call it lying?  I am not sure, but is certainly doesn't seem to be an honest, above board, or productive.

And you claim he is trying to move the conversation forward?  Isn't it more accurate to say that Mike is always anxious (over-anxious) to move the conversation toward HIS conclusion and only his confusion? And that he will move toward this conclusions whether the facts and analysis support this or not?  I really don't see this as an honest attempt to move the conversation forward, and I don't think you do either.   Look at what has just happened over the past few days for goodness sake.  Mike announced he was leaving for a month and we would all see how I go after others besides him.  I, for one, was looking forward to it.   But he couldn't even make it two hours without posting!  Two hours!   And by the next day he was not only posting, he was posting so much that was he burying his own posts, then reposting his old posts over the top of his own posts because he apparently thinks so much of his posts that he is afraid we will miss the 27th time he has repeated some article or another.  It seems to me that when he starts reposting old posts over the top of his own posts, and no one else has even posted, he might have a problem.   And now, like so many inconvenient facts he has managed to forget, his grand gesture of not posting for a month is not even a distant memory.

And while I agree with you that Mike gets an awful lot wrong, there is much more to it that this.  It is also how he is wrong, and what he is wrong about.  Remember a few months ago when he was repeatedly posting LIES about my dealings with Merion Golf Club?  I told him repeatedly he needed to stop and that he was wrong, yet he kept at it, insisting that his information was correct, and suggesting that I was lying about my dealings with the club.  With Cirba and Brauer were spreading these lies around here (and accusing me of lying) and the other two going after me offline with the same bullshit, I eventually had to contact Merion in order to set the record straight.  

I don't know about you, but I have trouble writing off his extremely reckless, irresponsible, and damaging false accusations and misrepresentations to "passion," especially because Cirba has done this same sort thing to me over and over again.   Somehow I think if you were in my position, you might not be so generous with your "passion" excuse.

And while you may think this is off-topic, it isn't.  Even now, in this thread, he is still going after everyone's motivations and has been from the beginning.  It isn't just that he is very often wrong, it is the constant hyperbole, the repeated mischaracterizations of the positions of others, the exaggerations, the sarcasm, and the endless attacks on everyone else's motives.  It is the same thing he does with all his witch hunts.   He takes a half-truth or even a flat out misrepresentation, and not only runs with it, he tries to use it to trash everyone else.   It is one thing to be wrong, but it is quite another to be wrong while simultaneously carrying on about how ridiculous is the opposition and/or how we are all just motivated by a petty agenda.  

Don't believe me? See for yourself.  While I really don't understand why, one of the issues here is whether to believe the AWT train story or the hunting story.    Whichever one believes (if either) is not as if Tom MacWood just made up the hunting story.  There are multiple accounts from reliable sources.  Yet, as usual, Mike is absolutely certain the AWT  must we correct.  I think he is probably wrong, but I don't really care about that.  What I object to is HOW he goes about it.  If Mike believes the AWT story, then in his mind anyone who would believe otherwise is not only wrong, there position is ridiculously irrational and they are agenda driven, biased, pathetic, idiots, historical revisionists, etc.  Here are just a few Cirba quotes from before I was actively engaged in the thread:

Jeez, Guys... A cynic might suggest that you are both trying to cast doubt on the credibility of poor ole Tilly, simply because his close connections with the game and contemporaneous crediting of Wilson at Merion and Crump at Pine Valley back then flies in the face of your attempts at revisionist history of Philadelphia golf 100 years later. Just saying...
. . .
Your bias in these matters is beyond comprehension and is clearly clouding your ability to accurately analyze the materials in question.
. . .
I know you desperately want to discredit Tillinghast as a source because he directly and contemporaneously upsets your "anybody but Wilson" theory at Merion and your "Only Colt" theory at Pine Valley, but I for one am thankful that he was on the scene and told us accurately what happened in each case.
. . .
Sadly, your biases have become obvious and pathetic and your positions have reached the point of absurdity.
. . .
If I see wild, unfounded speculation and I know the facts are different, I prefer to simply put those facts forward and leave it to others to find the truth.
. . .
I know you guys absolutely hate what Tillinghast wrote about Merion and Pine Valley because his contemporaneous accounts effectively kibosh your attempts to change history to your liking.   I can't help that, but understand how it can be frustrating to you.
. . .
It is absurdly illogical to think he was lying and you'd have to be an idiot not to see the landform from the train.
. . .
You do realize you've done a 180 here from your very reasonable, thoughtful former interpretation to this new extreme position designed to discredit Tillinghast, probably spurred on by Patrick's latest bout of madness motivated to goad Tom Paul to come back here on GCA.


That from the first THREE pages only.  Before I was actively involved.  It goes on throughout.  In more posts than not.

Is Mike being honest here?   Is the hunting story really "unfounded speculation" and so unreasonable so as to justify all of this?    Or is Mike blatantly mischaracterizing the nature of the discussion and the underlying facts?

And what if it turns out that Mike is wrong?  (Let's be honest here, he usually is.) Will he learn anything?  Will he apologize to all he insulted?  Will he try hard next time to not jump to conclusions and attack others based on emotion rather than facts?   Will he finally realize that there is skill and sound methodology involved in historical analysis, and actually try to learn something?   Or will he just move on to the next issue and do it all over again and exactly in the same manner?
« Last Edit: October 01, 2011, 11:00:49 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1314 on: October 02, 2011, 01:34:25 AM »
Tom Macwood, you said:

"There is not a single report of him playing the game that year prior to leaving the country, and the man was prolific golfer who was constantly in the papers (years before and after)."

I'm curious if you can substantiate this. Please help!

Jim,

Despite Brauer's sarcasm, there is at least some evidence that MacWood is correct.  For one thing, no on has been able to come up with anything indicating Crump golfed in 1910.   Having looked at these old papers, this was somewhat surprising to me, because he was a prominent golfer in Philadelphia and the press generally covered even their smaller tournaments.  

For example, in 1911, the Philadelphia Inquirer published articles mentioning Crump and golfing on April 28, May 13, July 24, Aug. 17, Aug. 27, Aug. 29, Sept. 11, Sept. 16, Sept. 17, Sept 24, Nov. 3, Nov. 4, Nov. 5, and Nov. 6.

I ran the same search for 1912, there were more articles than in 1911.

Same search for 1910 and there were zero articles mentioning Crump and golf.

So I went back to 1900.  From 1900 through 1906 Crump is regularly listed as golfing in local events.  No mentions in 1907-08 save one in which he was mentioned for not playing in his 1907 Club Championship (he had won the year before) because of "a recent bereavement."  I am not sure he golfed much for a few years after his wife died.  He was also running the hotel and dealing with legal issues relating to the sale during this time period.  He played his club championship in 1909, and was supposed to play in the Lesley Cup, but it is not clear he played.  Also, he is mentioned as a potential future participant in a match to settle a wager  No mentions in 1910.  In 1911 and beyond things seem to have gotten back to normal.  I guess he was no longer "constipated."

Now maybe my search was flawed, or maybe he was playing in some other city or only  at night, but that doesn't seem too likely, especially considering that we have one report that he just hadn't been playing much.  

Enough substantiation for you?   If not, what other substantiation do you require?
« Last Edit: October 02, 2011, 01:45:21 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1315 on: October 02, 2011, 06:05:07 AM »
So, no golf reports of Crump golfing with friends in Atlantic City from early November til late April?

Isn't that what I said?

I guess another myth has been dispelled...that Crump and friends played golf together every weekend during the winter in Atlantic City.

Jim,

I'll try to mock something up to explain better what I mean on the photos over the next few days...it's easier than trying to explain.

And, I agree the exercise is a bit ridiculous but at least one of the participants here is still trying to place the second green in the middle of that photo and I'm hoping to clear that up for everyone if I can.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1316 on: October 02, 2011, 10:18:30 PM »




I was asked to post these images by a friend.   

Interesting stuff.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 12:40:57 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1317 on: October 03, 2011, 01:11:41 AM »
The date is March 1913.

I am curious about what was written by Crump on the top middle.  Something about the greens being marked on the map same as on the ground?
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1318 on: October 03, 2011, 04:11:25 AM »

It has previously been said that the writing at the top is signed by Crump and says:

"Am not sure the greens are marked on the map as I marked them on the ground"

Could you post the individual pictures that make up the first composite picture?  I assume that they each is larger and easier to read in their original size and resolution.


Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1319 on: October 03, 2011, 06:55:31 AM »
David and Patrick,

Since you were able to get the stick routing map posted here, could you also post the 1913 photo of the 4th, 2nd green, and 3rd tee photo from the Brown book?

I understand that the resolution is much better than in the Shelly book and that there is another 10-15 yards viewable on the left side of the photo that includes the 3rd tee.

Even with that additional viewable width my understanding is also that the photo does not include the tree line (edge of clearing) along the third tee.

I believe that would help advance the conversation as to the location of the photographer in that photo.

Pat...if you don't know how to scan the photo, please shoot me an email and perhaps I can help someone in your office to do so.

Thanks.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 07:19:57 AM by MCirba »

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1320 on: October 03, 2011, 07:11:18 AM »
David,

P.S.   My understanding is that the writing on the top of the map says;

"Am not sure if the greens are marked on the map where I marked them on the ground---GAC"

What does that tell us about Crump's use of topos?

I'd venture to say it likely means he found the location of those proposed holes on the ground first and then tried to translate their location(s) to the topo map.   I'm not sure how it could mean the opposite and make any sense.

From the looks of the map, would you agree that it's fair to say that the permanent location of holes 1, 2, 3, 4 possibly 6 & 7 (although numbered differently), and 18 were generally located by the time he drew it?   I haven't seen the map in person, but that's what it looks like to me based on a quick glance.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 07:19:14 AM by MCirba »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1321 on: October 03, 2011, 09:54:34 AM »
Tom Macwood, you said:

"There is not a single report of him playing the game that year prior to leaving the country, and the man was prolific golfer who was constantly in the papers (years before and after)."

I'm curious if you can substantiate this. Please help!


Jim
Not only did he play in his club championship in 1909, he played in most of the major local events, and played in the 1909 Lesley Cup. The reason we know this? Because it was reported in local newspapers and golf magazines.

Has anyone been able to come up with a single report of him playing golf in 1910 prior to his trip abroad?

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1322 on: October 03, 2011, 09:58:56 AM »
David,

P.S.   My understanding is that the writing on the top of the map says;

"Am not sure if the greens are marked on the map where I marked them on the ground---GAC"

What does that tell us about Crump's use of topos?

I'd venture to say it likely means he found the location of those proposed holes on the ground first and then tried to translate their location(s) to the topo map.   I'm not sure how it could mean the opposite and make any sense.

From the looks of the map, would you agree that it's fair to say that the permanent location of holes 1, 2, 3, 4 possibly 6 & 7 (although numbered differently), and 18 were generally located by the time he drew it?   I haven't seen the map in person, but that's what it looks like to me based on a quick glance.

There is no way of knowing if this map was drawn by Crump, Crump and his 18 associates, or Colt. I suspect it was an early rough field drawing produced by Colt.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 10:07:03 AM by Tom MacWood »

Mike Cirba

Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1323 on: October 03, 2011, 10:03:32 AM »
Tom,

What revisionist alchemy in Columbus turns "HSC" turn into "GAC"?

Is there any evidence at all to suggest that Colt visited PV in 1911?   Is there any evidence that Colt went to any golf club except Toronto and/or Detroit in 1911?   Is there any evidence that PV was even on Colt's itinerary in 1913 prior to reports that has was going to be visiting the new courses at Merion and Seaview and was convinced to come and visit Crump?

What you suspect needs at least some factual basis or actual evidence to be worthy of our consideration here, no?
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 10:08:10 AM by MCirba »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pine Valley and Topos
« Reply #1324 on: October 03, 2011, 10:08:49 AM »
TMac,

My question is whether competing in local tournaments was all the golf he played?  Did papers report on every casual round of golf he played?  Did he ever take the train to compete in Atlantic City, or was that just with friends?

Can we reallymake the logical leap that:

NO reports of competitive golf in local tourneys that year, so he played no golf at all?

With the PHilly competitive golf season starting in spring (if not, no need for a winter course!) do we know that his stoppage started Jan 1, 1910, or did he play some in the winter leading up to the start of the spring competitive season?

I'm willing to concede it might have happened, but I don't know for sure.

As to the stick routing, first, I appreciate David posting it for our edification, as well as the other aerials posted earlier.

One thing I noted is that someone measured along the south property line (north is down and right), 1325 feet from the corner, and then in so far for the various green, tee and LZ points.  That is certainly surveyor type measuring, so someone did it or taught Crump well.  I note that the centerlines of the holes seem rather consistent, whereas if Crump laid out logical points on the ground, they would likely be varying distances from Tee to LZ.  That suggests some help from a gca (like Colt) who would probably lay things out via centerline, but we can't be sure.

Am I wrong, or is the photo missing holes 1-4?
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach