[ForkaB]

I cannot recommend too highly the archived issues of Golf Illustrated (& Outdoor America) which Lynne Shackleford first brought to our attention and to which Slag Bandoon provided the invaluable link below.

http://www.aafla.org

Browse and enjoy.

Rihc

PS--since TE Paul seems to be incommunicado these days I can conspiratorially admit that I like the articles that Max Behr (editor) writes.  Nobody tell TEP, please.......

[Robert Kimball]

I have GOT to stop logging on to GCA at work.  Knowing that I won't be able to help myself, I am sure much time will be spent today looking at these incredible archives!!  

Seriously, thank you for the link.  I am sure most everyone who comes to this site will find it very informative.

See you in the State of Georgia unemployment line!!!

[GeoffreyC]

VERY COOL-  Thanks Rich and thanks Lynn.  The articles are priceless and the search function seems to work pretty well.

[Dan Kelly]

A better link: http://www.aafla.org:8080/verity_templates/jsp/search/aafla_dosearch.jsp?QueryText=%28+Journal_Title+%3Ccontains%3E+Golf+Illustrated%29&query=%28+Journal_Title+
%3Ccontains%3E+Golf+Illustrated%29&start=0&explicitVQL=on&length=20&Coll=aafla_h
tml&Coll=aafla_pdf&chk20=Golf+Illustrated+%26+Outdoor+America&keyword=&select=&y
ears=&SUBMIT2=Search+Now&author=&atitle=&SortSpec=score+desc

I've looked only at No. 1 of 195 documents (Advertisements, March 1915 issue). Fascinating stuff! Don't miss the "COAT CUT SHIRT" ("Turn your shirt tails into drawers") ad. I want some o' them!

And be sure not to miss the ad, farther down, from the After-Dinner Golf Co.!

[Robert Kimball]

I just finished reading the details of the "new" course just built @ Merion.  The accompanying illustrations are fantastic.  Great stuff. . .

[ChipOat]

I believe that Ran will especially like the description and pictures of Merion's West Course.

[Paul_Turner]

That's the way of the future.  Wonder how they did it?  Much better than the traditional way, which took me ages to find the following early Pine Valley article:

http://209.204.62.73/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1915/gi4j.pdf

[ChipOat]

No D.A. on #10 in the Pine Valley article's picture!!

I wonder who added it and when?

[Mike_Cirba]

What I find amazing is the fact that author Simon Carr, a close friend of George Crump, goes to GREAT lengths to attribute the course design to Harry Colt!  

[Chris_Clouser]

I liked the articles highlighting the holes from the National.  Alps, Redan, Sahara and Cape.  Some good stuff.

[TEPaul]

Rich admitted;

"PS--since TE Paul seems to be incommunicado these days I can conspiratorially admit that I like the articles that Max Behr (editor) writes.  Nobody tell TEP, please......."

Rich:

Maybe next time it won't take you about two years to take my advice.

[TEPaul]

Rob Kimball said;

"I have GOT to stop logging on to GCA at work."

No you don't Rob. Golfclubatlas.com was fundamentally created to end people's work and employment. Things are much more enjoyable in the end that way! Even if people think they need to work--they really don't--it isn't absolutely necessary. Thinking about golf architecture is the only thing that's absolutely necessary.  

[ForkaB]

Tom

I will continue to take your advice at my peril and with a large grain of salt.  You should read these articles too.  Among other things, you will finally learn (as did your unindicted co-conspirator, Mike Cirba) that Pine Valley was in fact designed by Colt rather than Crump!

[Paul_Turner]

Mike

It is an interesting article!  The link seemed to have gone awry, so I've fixed it- takes a bit of time with a dial up.

It's not the whole picture, but definitely (to me anyway) dispells the myth that Colt only shifted the 5th green!

I hereby request that Ran addresses this issue in his PV write up  

There are some good pics of early St Georges Hill bunkers that certainly have some resemblance to the Hidden Creek bunkers posted on that thread (do a search under "Colt").

[TEPaul]

Rich said;

"You should read these articles too.  Among other things, you will finally learn (as did your unindicted co-conspirator, Mike Cirba) that Pine Valley was in fact designed by Colt rather than Crump!"

Rich:

I'm afraid not! I have read that article quite some time ago. That kind of remark of yours that that article proves that Harry Colt 'designed' Pine Valley is simply one that I would call really poor research and a poor assumption.

I recognize what the article says (from Carr) and I also recognize when the article was written. I also recognize that Crump worked on the golf course for another three years or more.

But what is becoming fairly undeniable is that portions of Pine Valley were already routed before Harry Colt arrived. Certainly commonsense would tell anyone that Harry Colt didn't route the holes that were done before he arrived and are holes that are Pine Valley today. Colt's hole drawings which are the next architectural step to routing will also tell in fairly exact detail what Colt's influence may have been and how much Crump followed that or did his own thing in the ensuing years (after 1913 when Colt was there). Crump afterall did work on the course daily for another five years and still the course was not complete when he died in 1918.

There's also an early routing map that apparently predated Colt. If so it would rather clearly show what Crump did before Colt and then comparing that to what the course is today can tell a lot as to who did what where and when.

It's my belief that at least holes 1-6 and probably #18 were routed as they are now before Colt arrived. Tillinghast, in an article previous to Colt's arrival mentioned that nine holes had been routed and cleared.

And anyway, if one looks logically at the single thing that Colt has always been given complete credit for--ie fixing hole #5 one can see a sort of obvious fact. If Colt fixed #5, what did he fix? What was there previous to him "fixing" it in other words? What was there was the tee position, the basic routing direction over the pond but with a green shorter and to the right of where the green is today. What Colt did is reposition the green to where it is today. But obviouisly Crump found the basic landform of #5 today. And interestingly that shorter green site to the right is on that earlier routing map, so what does that logically tell you?

And the same thing presents itself on hole #2. It was routed previous to Colt's arrival. Crump had the green postioned where it is today and Colt recommended moving it to the left and postioning #3 tee where #2 green is today, inspiring Crump to make his famous remark; "No Good".

Depending on Simon Carr's article as you just did of proof positive that Colt routed and designed Pine Valley just doesn't really work. There's far too much evidence and even documentation around to say otherwise.

There was undeniably a lot of collaboration between Colt and Crump but one just has to look more closely at the timelines both before and after Colt was at Pine Valley for about a week or perhaps two. After that in the late spring of 1913 he never returned.

I know that Paul Turner, for one, does not like to hear these things but in my mind there's a real likelihood that Geo Crump did not mind using Harry Colt's name and reputation at all and possibly with Colt's willing participation in what may have been a bit of an ultimate ruse. The $10,000 fee reported by Baker some forty years later might have been part of that! It only makes sense if one really studies Crump. He never appeared in the slightest bit proprietary with his course as to who did what and in fact welcomed and encouraged collaboration from all kinds of designers and designing minds. He may have even allowed credit to some of them who did nothing at all, such as Chick Evans.

Crump was also a pretty good promoter and obviously realized, particularly in 1913 and 1914 that the world of golf and architecture would take far more to the name Colt than to the unknown name Crump!

And what is one to make of the voluminous remarks and articles from 1918 when Crump died? From Tillinghast particularly who certainly was a good friend and close collaborator with Crump. When the course neared completion in 1918 as opposed to that much earlier Simon Carr article everyone was more than ready to give Crump credit without hesitation with being the architect of Pine Valley.

It would not be at all accurate to say, as you just did Rich, that Colt was the architect of Pine Valley. What is possible though with all that still remains to be analyzed is to figure out exactly what Harry Colt did and what he didn't do. So far it's becoming clearer what he didn't do.

[TEPaul]

"There are some good pics of early St Georges Hill bunkers that certainly have some resemblance to the Hidden Creek bunkers posted on that thread (do a search under "Colt")."

Paul:

I would certainly hope so since Hidden Creek was a dedicated tribute to the early Heathland architecture, and the bunkering of Hidden Creek was suppose to be the most obvious evidence of that Heathland tribute.

[eckstein]

TE
An amazing article on PVGC, thank you for sharing....I had no idea that Colt was the designer of PV. Then again maybe this Carr figure was uninformed....can we trust his opinion. Do you think Crump objected to this article and what it implied?

[TEPaul]

edstein:

Colt was not the designer of Pine Valley although he certainly had a real hand in some of the routing and probably some of the design ideas, particularly early on.

What some seem to fail to understand about Pine Valley is that golf course was a work in progress by Crump himself for over six years, from 1912 until he died in 1918. Crump was the guy who called the shots on the golf course despite the unprecedented amount of collaboration he inspired and encouraged.

The golf course was constantly under construction for a very long time and that doesn't only include the so-called hole designing phase, it also includes the finalization of the routing to a degree. The latter alone any professional architect might tell you is sort of a cumbersome and potentially problematic thing to do. Not to actually complete and finalize a golf course's routing before getting well under way on construction is not really normal. It might even be said that it may have been the initial modus operandi of an amateur architect. But Crump may have also taken more time on the design details and the construction of his course than anyone anywhere.

And despite taking so much time the really remarkable thing to consider is the day he died he even viewed some of what he'd already constructed as temporary--things that are still there today he actually may have viewed as temporary--to be altered and perfected later.

The course was finally completed around 1922 about ten years after it was begun.

Simon Carr, a priest, was one of Crump's closest friends and a very trusted one as to what was going on at Pine Valley and what Crump was thinking about the course. So was William P. Smith, the other man who wrote the "remembrances" of what Crump wanted to do that the 1921 Advisory Committee relied on to complete the course after Crump's untimely sudden death.

So yes, Carr sure is reliable, at least he was to Crump. That article of Simon Carr's giving so much credit to Colt, though, could have much truth to it at least when it was written. But then one needs to note that the article was written very early in the construction and design of Pine Valley. A lot went on after that article was written.

But the thing that makes me wonder about the real truth of that article is that it appears more went on than most have to date understood before Colt arrived. There really does appear to be enough documentation and evidence at Pine Valley and elsewhere to prove that. What I'm saying is it appears possible to really pin down who did what and when!

But it certainly isn't beyond the realm of possibility, even probable, in fact, that Crump may have been interested in using Harry Colt's name as much as possible. Why wouldn't he?  Starting in 1912 as an unknown amateur architect and interested in promoting his golf course and populating his membership why wouldn't he be interested in promoting the name of the famous English architect rather than his own? Frankly, it appears Crump never promoted himself in the slightest at any time. He apparently was a remarkably generous man and one really loved by his many friends.

And anyone who really studies how Pine Valley evolved over such a long creation period can clearly see that Crump really was unknown when he began but when he died six years later in 1918, both he and his golf course were glorified in the world of golf architecture. The world of architecture appears to have been stunned when he died.

Why was that? How did that happen? Can anyone really make a case it happened because he carefully followed the plans for the next five years of an architect who was there for a week or two in 1913 never to return? I hardly think so.

But then there is that routing map with both Colt's and Crump's hand on it. The bunkering and such in Crump's hand happens to be the way the course turned out. The routing shows both men's hand---but then there is an earlier one that I believe can show what was done before Colt arrived.

My feeling is Colt may have had a hand in even routing holes 7-17 and perhaps offering all kinds of design ideas. But we also know how long Crump struggled to finalize the routing of holes 12-15 and those holes hadn't really been finalized for construction in the details of their actual design features when he died.

One has to appreciate that at the very least whatever Colt did offer Crump in 1913 an awful lot of things changed between then and 1918 when Crump died.

But basically for someone to say, at this point, that Harry Colt designed Pine Valley just shows thay don't really understand that much about the way the golf course came into existence.

edstein asked;

"Do you think Crump objected to this article and what it implied?

No I do not. I think it might even be probable that George Crump encouraged that article.

There are a lot of interesting things that may have been going on back then that many may have never known about or long since forgotten about.

For instance, an old Philadelphia newspaper article just resurfaced about an interview with George Crump in the summer of 1917 approximately six months before he died. Crump had purchased an additional 400-500 acres contiguous to Pine Valley (which makes up all that Pine Valley is today)!

What did he plan to do with all that land? Protection was one idea but another idea that he stated to the interviewer was that he planned on building a second course at Pine Valley as soon as he finished the first course. What did he want to build the second course for? He wanted to build a course strictly and specifically designed for women!

How do you like them apples?

[SPDB]

TE Paul

Whose routing idea was the cape hole for #14, making it a 4 instead of a 3? I read the article yesterday, but I think there is some mention either of the Cape hole, or the fact that the par 3s were 3 in number.

[TEPaul]

SPDB:

I really don't know whose idea that cape hole iteration was at #14 but it was a really interesting idea if you know how it would fall on that land. To me it could have been the most perfect conceptual copy in playability of the original Cape hole at NGLA as it could be driven in a high risk play. But it also had a tee setup much shorter to play as a par 3. If it was actually done, though, as designed on the land it would have meant that #15 would have had to be a long par 4 and Pine Valley may have then been short a par 5. However, it's well known that Crump was toying with the idea of making #16 the par 5 (even though it was already built as a par 4) by pushing #16 green site much farther out maybe around behind where #14 green is now. And that would have meant that #17 would have been a longer hole although basically designed as is which in fact was one of its iterations. In one drawing #17 measured out to around 375+ which of course is longer than it is now from the tips.

But to date no one seems sure who did this set of hole drawings. It certainly wasn't Harry Colt. The thinking is they're Crump's own drawings particularly since so many of the drawings are the way the course actually was built and the bunkering is very similar to the way it was built.

[Paul_Turner]

Oh no!  Nothing like stirring the pot.  Waiting for the Philly mafia to come and get me!

Yes, I certainly do reject the $10,000 for a "signature design" theory   It's a poor one, and it's funny how that sum of money is used to justify certain theories.  Before, when it was claimed that Colt had virtually no input, that $10,000 figure was dismissed as pie in the sky.  I don't see other designers of the day, being shown in this kind of light!

Carr is pretty explicit that this course isn't for profit and that the club is almost full.  The truth is that PV has very little press in the golf magazines while it is being built.  Compare it with the National!

Tillinghast does describe holes 1-6 before Colt gets there (in some, but not great, detail).  But there are some significant differences in the holes he describes and the end result.  Most notably, the 5th, 6th (Tillie describes as a par 5) 3rd (Tillie describes Mid Surrey mounds).  There is an old, basic stick routing plan which might or might not predate Colt's arrival.  The stick routing does seem to follow most of Tillinghast's 1-6 description and is similar to the final routing plan of those holes although the 1st is a significantly sharper dogleg; the 4th is a slightly different shape too; the 5th is completely different. There are some weird holes drawn after the 6th that bare no resemblance to the finished course!

One thing I am sure about, from research of the old mags, is that the course before Crump's death was referred to as Colt's design. By Carr, Walter Travis and Jerome Travers-all of whom were very familiar with the project- credit Colt.  And even Tillinghast changes his tune and gives Colt full credit after his May 1913 visit!  

After Crump's death there seems to be a concerted effort to give Crump total credit(understandably), most notably by Tillinghast.

As for Harry himself, I have several copies of advertisments he sent out to prospective clubs in the 1920's.  Next to each club he has worked at, he adds a code:

AA=Designed and Supervised
A=Designed
BB=Major Redesign and Supervised
B=Major Redesign
C=Minor Redesign

Next to PV he has "A".  

I also have a copy of an early article he wrote for an American magazine in Oct 1914 describing Sunningdale.  He writes: "The only course in America that I have seen which resembles it in any way is the new course at Pine Valley, near Philadelphia, which I had the honour to lay out last year."

Colt also had large photo scrapbook of Pine Valley from around 1916, sent to him by Crump (it's at the USGA).   I have an essay from a chap called Lord Babbington who was with Colt when he built Portrush.  Babbington desribes this photobook, when Colt shows it to him as an example of his work.

So, I think we can certain of how Colt himself felt about his input.  And it certainly wasn't as a publicity figure or a ruse!

(We also should remember who was the expert and who was the amateur!  And at least we have more to go on than at Bethpage.)

It's well known that the 13th and 14th were changed later on in the project, and were not as Colt planned.  The 15th is as COlt routed, although the tee was pushed back onto the island.
The 12th is routed close to how Colt planned, but the green angle is different.

In the final analysis I think PV should probably be listed (as it usually is, except by the club itself) as a codesign course, with possibly Alison included:  Colt/Crump/Alison  

Tom

I've never located where this claim about the Colt fixing 5th  originates.  I've only seen it in modern texts that originate from Finnegan's flawed analysis.  Absolutely nothing about this in the contemporary golf magazines, quite the opposite in fact.

Tom Doak is the only person I have met that has seen Colt's PV book and he maintained that it is similar to the final result.  The bunkers are more formal but the strategy is there.  These hole drawings have to be taken in the context of knowing how Colt's other designs looked at the time, particularly in the heathlands given their similarity to PV.

[eckstein]

Now that is some fine research....thanks for sharing Paul Turner.

TE
I think you may owe Rich an apology....it seems the "famous name" theory is not based on facts uncovered through really good research.

[TEPaul]

Paul:

As you know I feel quite differently about the details of how Pine Valley originally and finally came to be both routed and designed than you do.

In the spirit of a good and friendly debate I hope then to eventually prove you wrong as claiming that Pine Valley should even be a co-design.

I feel that your characterization of Crump's actual input into the design of the course following his death by those who paid tribute to what he did is as off base as you apparently feel my characterization of the $10,000 Colt fee is which really isn't a chararcterization merely a possibility.

I think there is far too much material available both before and particularly after Colt was there to certainly ever accurately say that Colt was the designer of Pine Valley.

Holes 1-6 I'm fairly certain about and probably #18. After that it certainly is possible and probably likely that Colt had a good deal of original influence. But at that point (7-17) no one will probably ever know which one of them did what. But the collaboration and input from others continued long after Colt left and things are just known to have changed from the time Colt was there and that can also be seen on the routing map. The early routing map though I think reveals a lot particularly if it can be dated accurately as preceding Colt which I believe it logically to be. It also tracks exactly what Tillinghast said about those hole preceding Colt.

And I really can't understand why you would assume that Jim Finegan's analysis is so flawed. After all he did have complete access to the entire Pine Valley archives which includes all these magazine articles. He even took the whole thing home for a few years. He's also a very good researcher and certainly knows the course like the back of his hand.

The only mistake I can see that Jim made is in assuming that the routing map was completed in March of 1913 which happens to have been the date the surveyor probably finished that particular survey map--not when the routing was completed on it. That obviously can have huge implications though. And I don't think that Jim necessarily knew that the blue lines are Colt's and the other drawin lines are Crump's.

I have absolutely nothing whatsoever against Colt and I'm not trying to glorify Crump either. It wouldn't matter to me if everything there was by Colt but that now is clearly a ridiculous assumption to make. I just want to see the attribution for the course accurately assigned.

And I also think it's a poor assumption on your part to assume that Crump was being glorified for Pine Valley simply because he died. That would essentially be calling someone like Tillinghast a pretty bold-faced liar as he was pretty comprehensive about what he said about Crump and afterall he was a good friend and he certainly was there all the time long after Colt left.

The alteration to the right side of #1 (bunkering) was a real concern to Crump and something that is well known by him.

I just feel right now that most people don't understand or appreciate what may have happened there both before and particularly the years after Colt left. The evidence has always been there obviously, just not looked at that accurately in my book. If Crump was basically just constructing a golf course to Colt's plans it certainly would not have taken so many years to do so and I doubt he would have slaved over the architecture everyday for the years he did. And he certainly doesn't seem to have been just constructing to someone else's plan---there's just way too much evidence around to disprove that.

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

I don't think you'll ever be able to prove that Colt isn't even deserving of co-credit.  That's bonkers  I suppose Colt was just used for his name and drawing skills!?  

All in good fun, though.

It's absolutely not clear cut about 1-6, not from Tillie's report, nor the incomplete stick plan (that's all it is, with no hole width or green shapes, apart from maybe the 1st).  And at the very least not the 5th!  But also, the 6th is described as a par5 by Tillie, so that doesn't track either.  The 3rd isn't Alpinized, a design feature that Colt clearly disliked from his writing.   I stand by what I wrote for the 1st and 4th, compare it to Colt's blue pen routing plan.
 
As far as I can work out from old photos in magazines, the course had holes 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,16,17,18 pretty much set by 1916 at the latest-in routing and much of the hazard placement.  11 holes were open by Feb 1914 less than a year after Colt's visit.  Were these changed significantly before Crump died? I haven't any photos to indicate as much.  Sure looking at Colt's routing plan, some of his hazards aren't there now, and some have been added by, presumably, Crump.  But you've got to be careful here, because the red pen (Crumps?) is simply over much of the blue (Colt's).  We need to see Colt's book in full and even then it's open to some interpretation.

We know that 4 greens were changed to Alison's specs, and Maxwell built 2 greens at the 8th and 9th.  Tillinghast claims credit for the 13th and Hell's Half Acre on the 7th.  The 15th is as Colt routed, apart from the island tee, the 12th isn't much different.  

At this point, perhaps it's Crump who's struggling for a co-design credit.  What's left, the 14th, some green contours(?) and some bunker placement?

I'm not sure why it's assumed that Crump slaves away for every day for the next 5 years.   Where's the evidence?  I haven't seen any to prove this, not in the magazines, not in photos.  Is it in the archives? Didn't the members want to play some golf ASAP?   I know there's evidence that Crump had ideas of radically changing holes like 6,7,11, but the truth is, this never happened.

If Finnegan had access to all these magazine articles, why didn't he mention the most important and detailed one by Carr?  His writing comes across, to me, as biased.   No creative credit is given to Alison.   Why did he only show a single hole the 17th, from of Colt's book, and then stress the difference in that hole rather than the similarities (the very oldest pics are actually very much like Colt's drawing)?  Why not reproduce all 18 so we can make up our own minds?  

I don't think it's off base to speculate that Crump was glorified after his death.  Wouldn't that be natural for such a loved man?  Tillie's contemporary "Hazard" psuedo articles are inconsistent, he switches back and forth on credit.  Some of his details are inconstistent, particularly the recollections that don't always tally with what he wrote at the time as "Hazard".  

I read some affectionate glorification in his final article after Crump's death-they were very close.   Quoting Tillie:

"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 consensus of opinion, carefully 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. "

Finally, lets be honest  It does matter to me and you,who designed PV.  It's PV!  Why else would you want to prove to me that Colt isn't deserving of a co-design?

[ForkaB]

eckstein

I don't expect Tom Paul to apologise to me (nor to you, for calling you "edstein.")  The Paul family motto is "Jamais s'excuser!"  It's one of their loveable little quirks.

All I've read on this subject is the Carr article, which seems to me to be pretty definitive about PV being a Colt design.  Since Carr was the Secretary of PV at the time, I assume that he did not speak without knowledge of the "issue."

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()