Merion clarification

[Patrick_Mucci]

Great quote, Marco.

Banks' descritpion of Yale's "Redan" seems to be entirely faithful to the original (unlike MacDonald's attempt at NGLA, which is a downhill hole, regardless of what Mucci "thinks".......).

"Downhill" ?  Hardly, unless you consider a 3-6 foot change in elevation over about 600 feet or two football fields, to be downhill.

Yale's Redan is steeply downhill, not unlike the reverse Redan at The Creek.

When I'm there next, I'll shoot it with a transit.

That being said, if the 3rd at Merion is any kind of "Redan" (except in the twisted minds of rabid MacDonaldophiles) I'll eat my shorts (metaphorically, of course....).

Have you played the 8th at The Creek ?
# 13 at Morris County ?
# 3 at Piping Rock ?

[ChipOat]

Bill,

It was a pretty quiet road through the mid-1970's - and a VERY quiet road from 1908 until post WWII.

The Hamptons didn't really start to get hot until the Baby Boomers on Wall Street began to make their mark.  When the stock market first took off in late 1982, that was the beginning of the real explosion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chip, that is a GREAT point that NGLA crosses a road!

Chip & Bill,

The original NGLA crossed more than one road.

The original road leading to the club house is the current road leading to the maintanance barn.

Thus another road was crossed on # 13, and it continues to be crossed today.

And then, after the 14th was rerouted and the entrance changed, the 18th crossed the entrance road, and still does today

[DMoriarty]

I am glad that some of you are actually considering the routing puzzle at Merion.  As you can see, it just isn't easy to fit the holes. That is why in June 1910, CBM wrote that Merion's "most difficult problem" was a routing problem-- how to fit 18 first class holes on the land they were considering for purchase.

The existence of this "most difficult problem" is one of the reasons I believe that they must have had at least a rough routing in place by November 1910. Merion wanted and needed to know whether they could fit 18 first class golf holes on such an awkward piece of land, and the only way to know if this was possible would have been to try and figure out if 18 quality holes would actually fit.

So when CBM wrote, "So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House,"  I believe CBM/HJW must have already had at least a rough idea of how they could fit the holes.  (Or they were working off of someone else's rough idea of how the holes might fit.)

How else could CBM provide a qualified assurance that "it can be done" to Merion?  

And why else would CBM write that he thought the 18 holes would fit provided the parcel near the clubhouse was added? If he wasn't trying to figuring out where the holes fit, how could he know they needed this additional parcel?

This also provides some clarity to the April 1911 Board Minutes and the mention of how Lesley's Committee had previously laid out many courses on the land.  They could have been laying out many courses (likely Barker's, CBM's, and some variations on their own (including the Francis suggestion) to see if they could fit a first class course on the property.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

It's hard to argue with that logic, although I'm sure that some will try.

Thanks for the revised draft on the "Missing Faces", I'll get to it this weekend

[Rich Goodale]

Great quote, Marco.

Banks' descritpion of Yale's "Redan" seems to be entirely faithful to the original (unlike MacDonald's attempt at NGLA, which is a downhill hole, regardless of what Mucci "thinks".......).

"Downhill" ?  Hardly, unless you consider a 3-6 foot change in elevation over about 600 feet or two football fields, to be downhill.

Yale's Redan is steeply downhill, not unlike the reverse Redan at The Creek.

When I'm there next, I'll shoot it with a transit.

That being said, if the 3rd at Merion is any kind of "Redan" (except in the twisted minds of rabid MacDonaldophiles) I'll eat my shorts (metaphorically, of course....).

Have you played the 8th at The Creek ?
# 13 at Morris County ?
# 3 at Piping Rock ?

I suppose that to a Gyrene, every landform is uphill......

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I will offer a theory on whether or not he considered a sketch routing when he wrote that letter.

I agree they had to have some things settled.  It is all part of the continum typical to most routings (especially when developers donate/sell land to the gc). In this case, I think they were considering an initial basic land allocation proposal from the developer (as drawn in one day by Barker) that showed the developers general idea for golf buffering the rail line from houses, giving MCC it's 100 acres, while they indicate they wanted to use the old farm house as their clubhouse to save money.

And, knowing that, when you route, you do need to figure out both how to get away and back to the clubhouse.  You also need to figure out tight areas. Most architects, including CBM, quickly realize they would need 1 and 18, plus two other holes (as it turns out 13, 14) to get from one parcel to another.  So, I can see, based on experience, how he could understand that particular problem without having done a full propsed routing.  BTW, I suspect he quickly informed them of the need to get the Dallas Estate to make the parcel south of Ardmore long enough to fit holes on that June 1910 day, as well.  That is a question of basic dimensions of four holes wide, with two on each side of the creek, but not long enough to fit a the required 2-3 holes at proper lengths.  Just how they ran up and down the creek could be figured out later. 

So, I believe he could assess the property based on some of those critical areas and their dimensons, without having done much of any routing.  I have always taken his "no topo in front of him" comment to mean he wasn't routing, and the idea that they had the flexibility to get more land for a price, and set the border later as evidence that they were nowhere near having a final routing when the bought the property.
 
Perhaps its semantics of what actually constitutes a proposed routing, and I can see why you say some kind of routing must have existed.  He almost certainly looked at the Barker routing in that meeting, and immediately began to see whatever problems there were with it.  He may have quickly drawn out the problem areas to illustrate them to the Merion members, which may have gotten Barker's routing closer to the final form it would take.   And whether he ever put pencil to paper or not, selecting that basic parcel based on his advice did create the final form of MCC, albeit, with a few tweaks along the way. 

If we rely only on the written record, it reads as if that first visit was concerned soley with advising on the land purchase, and not routing.  First things first.  Certainly MCC didn't know much at that time, and relied heavily on CBM's expertise.  I doubt that he would give a recommendation without truly believing it, but just don't know how much study he might require to be comfortable in making that recommendation.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff, you make some interesting points and I agree with some but not all . . .

1. CBM's and HJ Whigham's Routing Methodology.  Jeff, while I do appreciate your perspective, I nonetheless think that CBM himself is the best source when it comes to what he and H.J Whigham looked for when studying a property for a potential golf course.  And it sounds to me like their process was very different than the one you describe.  When CBM and HJ Whigham inspected the land at NGLA, they studied the land looking for golf holes.  And not just any golf holes, but the types of holes they thought ought to be included on a first class golf course.  First they found the Alps, then the Redan, then a location the 160 yard Eden (with the CBM addition that it ought to be over water,) then they found a Cape, etc.   Once they had found the holes they marked off the land they wanted for purchase.  Isn't it fair to assume they'd have followed a similar path at Merion?

2. CBM's Advice Regarding Whether a Course Would Fit.  You wrote, "If we rely only on the written record, it reads as if that first visit was concerned soley with advising on the land purchase, and not routing.  First things first.  You also wrote, "I have always taken his 'no topo in front of him' comment to mean he wasn't routing . . ."

Perhaps our differences are semantics as you say, Jeff.  Because to me CBM is squarely addressing the routing even though he was not then in a position to provide a completed routing plan.

The most difficult issue CBM was trying to resolve:  Fitting 18 first class golf holes on the proposed parcel.   What is "routing" if not fitting 18 quality golf holes on the proposed property?  And keep in mind that this was CBM, so he isn't just looking for any golf holes.   He had specific ideas of the types of golf holes that made up a first class 18 golf course!

To my mind, he was focused very much on their routing problem.  It looks to me like he told Merion that while he solved their routing puzzle, he couldn't yet show them his work or double check it.   He needed a contour map for that.

3. Issues Specific to the Proposed Property.   You mentioned that, "when you do route, you do need to figure out both how to get away and back to the clubhouse.  You also need to figure out tight areas."  But didn't this property have quite a few "tight areas" as well as other areas where one would have needed to consider getting in and out?

I'll mention just one: The land behind the clubhouse.  CBM told Merion that they needed to add the parcel by the clubhouse if they wanted the golf course to fit, and he seems to have been referring to the <3 acre parcel behind the clubhouse.  (Site of original 13th hole and part of 12th hole.)  
  - Isn't this relatively isolated <3 acre parcel the very definition of  a "tight area?"  It was across the road, on the other side of the creek, and on the wrong side of the clubhouse!  
  - Also, I don't understand how this particular advice fits into your theory that they were not doing much routing.  If CBM was not looking for golf holes, why advise Merion that they needed to add <3 acres which was relatively isolated behind the clubhouse?   And if you have a tight area like the area behind the clubhouse, don't you have to figure your route into it and out of it as well?  
 - (The joke at the time was that the route from the 13th green to the 14th tee was through the bar in the clubhouse.  Sounds like yet another CBM 'tell' to me.)

4. The Flexible Border.  As you recall on the Nov. 1910 map, the road border was "approximate" and Merion had some flexibility in adjusting the location of the road.  While the rest of the course was locked in place, the flexibility of the location of the road allowed Merion to snugly fit the property line to on this section to the golf course, so they didn't have to buy any more than they needed.  

But in order to add more holes to the East, wouldn't Merion have had to extend the course to the East by at least the width of a hole corridor?  And didn't Francis tell us that the land to the east didn't really fit into any potential layout, suggesting it just wasn't good for golf?
If this was the case then how does this flexible border  allow for much greater routing flexibility?

In short, the flexible border seems to have been for fine-tuning.  Not as a cure-all to all potential routing woes.  Otherwise, why would CBM have said that fitting the holes was their "most difficult problem?"  And why would CBM have told them they needed to add the land behind the clubhouse to get the land to work?

5.  The HH Barker Routing.  I am glad you agree that CBM/HJW most certainly would have started with the Barker routing.   But as for your "first things first" order of things, won't this make a difference in how CBM/HJW viewed the land?    The routing process had already begun and there was a routing in place.  He's got a routing in his hands.  It is hard for me to imagine that they could be looking at this routing and looking at the land, yet NOT looking for golf holes!  

[Dan Herrmann]

David,
I know I missed your point on this, but it's probably easier to ask again.

When you say that CBM was a consultant on the routing, in your opinion, was this "stick figure" type routing, or actual hole design, with green shapes, fairway and greencontouring, shaping, bunker placement, etc?

Regarding "Stick figures":  I don't know if you've ever been to Sand Hills, but there's a fantastic piece of GCA art in the dining room - a "constellation" diagrams of hundreds of holes that C&C drew.    (See post 11 and 12 at http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?topic=18697.11 if you want to see what I'm getting at).

Thanks

[ChipOat]

Patrick,

You are, as usual correct regarding the FACTS.  However, I don't believe the interior roads at NGLA are relevant to my comparative analogy of Ardmore Avenue and the busy public road that #'s 8 and 11 at NGLA have always crossed.

After all, the interior private roads at NGLA are utilized by members, guests, caddies, clubhouse/professional staff and maintenance personnel that (almost always) STOP when golfers are playing across them.  My point was directed exclusively to now-busy public throughfares.

So, yes - you are not technically incorrect.  However, I believe NGLA is unlikely to ever see the need to build berms on the two interior private roads you have correctly identified.

Therefore, let me clarify my Ardmore Avenue comparison to exclude NGLA's private "driveways" for reasons described in paragraph #2 above.

Thank you.

[DMoriarty]

Dan Herrmann, I don't believe I've assigned any title such as "consultant" to CBM.  You and others can call him whatever you want, I am just trying to figure out what happened.

I am talking about a rough routing.  So far as I know, no one has located any routing map or lay-out plan for the initial course at Merion East.  We don't have the Barker routing.  We don't have any sort of routing map provided by CBM, other than his qualified assurance that a first class course would fit.  We don't have any routing showing Francis' suggestions.  We don't have the CBM "plans" they were going over at NGLA, or even of the layout plan as finally determined by CBM in April of 1911.  And we don't know for certain the level of detail of any of these plans.  But given the CBM noted he would need a contour map to determine for certain whether the golf course would fit on the property, it doesn't sound too detailed at this early stage.
 
Keep in mind that HH Barker had already put pencil to paper and sketched out a routing, and Merion already had HH Barker's routing. Perhaps CBM and HJW made their suggested changes/routing right on top of Barker's routing.  They could have shown them what he thought the routing would be while they were out there or otherwise communicated their ideas for the rough routing to Lloyd, Lesley, and/or Griscom.  Maybe they sketched it in the dirt.

Keep in mind also that we know for a FACT that during this early time period CBM/HJW's communications with members at Merion were NOT limited to CBM's single letter.
__________________________________


By the way . . . Regarding whatever you think Wilson did in terms of planning the routing before meeting with CBM at NGLA to go over his plans . . . Were Wilson's contribution(s) in the form of a stick routing or a more detailed plan?  

Have you ever come up with any evidence from pre-NGLA meeting that indicates that Hugh Wilson was even yet involved in the planning?  

___________________________________

I have seen the constellation map at Sand Hills.  Neat.  But except for that it demonstrates that architects look for golf holes when they examine a property, I am not sure I understand the relevance.  Bill Coore had a bit more land to choose from at Sand Hills and a bit more land suitable terrain within that land.  

But let's pretend that  Mr. Youngscap had wanted the course to fit on just under 120 acres in three parcels roughly shaped like an "L" with a road separating off one parcel and the already existing clubhouse and the road separating the other, and a big quarry taking up a big chunk of the third.  And lets put an unmovable border around 70-80% of the property, and uninteresting land where the border may have been somewhat elastic.  Oh yeah and lets replace the sand hills with farm land. Do you suppose Bill Coore or any other first class architect would have given even their qualified assurances to Mr. Youngscap that a first class golf course would fit on this property without some idea of how the golf holes would fit?

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,
I know I missed your point on this, but it's probably easier to ask again.

When you say that CBM was a consultant on the routing, in your opinion, was this "stick figure" type routing, or actual hole design, with green shapes, fairway and greencontouring, shaping, bunker placement, etc?

Dan,

Are you looking for a detailed, "Donald Ross" type of hole and routing plan, layed out on graph paper with precise measurements ?

What's the essential difference in a preliminary routing, if it's a "stick figure" drawing versus a "rough sketch" of the general holes, absent Rossian details/dimensions ?

Do you think that CBM first routed NGLA with Rossian precision, including actual hole design, green shapes, fairway and green contouring, shaping, bunker placement, etc.."  

It's an absolutely absurd question, one posed with the deliberate intent of denying CBM's involvement.



Regarding "Stick figures":  I don't know if you've ever been to Sand Hills, but there's a fantastic piece of GCA art in the dining room - a "constellation" diagrams of hundreds of holes that C&C drew.    (See post 11 and 12 at http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?topic=18697.11 if you want to see what I'm getting at).  

Have you ever been to Sand Hills and seen the "Constellation Routing" ?
If so, when were you there ?

Would you say that the Constellation Routing is as detailed as you would expect in 1910 ?

Thanks

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

You are, as usual correct regarding the FACTS.  However, I don't believe the interior roads at NGLA are relevant to my comparative analogy of Ardmore Avenue and the busy public road that #'s 8 and 11 at NGLA have always crossed.

Chip,

The road that cuts across # 8 and # 11 only came into use when RT 27 was only a two lane road and would get backed up.
In fact, you can't make a left onto that road on certain days, during certain hours.
When the back roads reconnect to RT 27, further East, they now prevent you from making a left back onto RT 27.

Recently, RT 27 has been widened to 4 lanes, easing the backroad traffic a bit.

After all, the interior private roads at NGLA are utilized by members, guests, caddies, clubhouse/professional staff and maintenance personnel that (almost always) STOP when golfers are playing across them.  My point was directed exclusively to now-busy public throughfares.

So, yes - you are not technically incorrect.  However, I believe NGLA is unlikely to ever see the need to build berms on the two interior private roads you have correctly identified.

Therefore, let me clarify my Ardmore Avenue comparison to exclude NGLA's private "driveways" for reasons described in paragraph #2 above.

Thank you.

Will you be on any of those roads in another two weeks or so ?

[DMoriarty]

Here is a copy of the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan showing the 117 acres that Merion had agreed to purchase.   Some believe that Merion committed to purchase this property without having any idea of how a golf course might fit on the property.  This despite the FACTS that they already had a routing in hand from HH Barker, and they had already imposed upon CB Macdonald and HJ Whigham to come to Philadelphia and tell them "what could be done with the property."



Only the sections marked "Merion Golf Course" were to be included in the initial purchase.  I've added a few colored lines. The green lines show the west and north borders of the portion of the HDC development above Ardmore Ave.

The red lines mark an area of the proposed purchase of the course.   According to Richard Francis, the area above the dotted line was not even being considered for purchase until Francis was going over plans and trying to fit the last five holes, and figured out that this small triangle of land  would allow Merion to fit the last five holes.  As you can see, by Nov. 15, 1910 this section of land had already been added to the golf course property. So if Francis' description is accurate, then the routing was in place before Nov. 15, 1910.  

The blue lines mark the borders of the small parcel (<3 acres) of land behind the clubhouse which was controlled by a Railroad.  On June 29, 1910 CBM had indicated that Merion could fit 18 first class holes on the property "provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Clubhouse," and Merion would indeed acquire the land by leasing from the RR.  If CBM had not been concerned with how the holes would fit on the land, then why would he tell the club that they needed to acquire this awkward and isolated parcel in order to fit 18 first class golf holes onto the property?  Why not have them just add land to the east?  How does he know that the course wouldn't work without this land?

It looks to me that this property had quite a few "tight areas" and difficult routing challenges.  

[Dan Herrmann]

David,
Thanks - the Constellation Map reference was used because it's a routing versus a complete golf course design.  Thought it might provide a good reference point for understanding

In post 160, you said, ""Keep in mind also that we know for a FACT that during this early time period CBM/HJW's communications with members at Merion were NOT limited to CBM's single letter."
 
Could you expand on that a bit?  Were there other communications from CBM/HJW to the Merion membership during the early time period?

Thanks
 

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I believe Francis said that land west of the proposed road wasn't under consideration.  In effect, that road alignment was too wide in some spots and too narrow up at the north end to be effectively used.

I have explained a scenario where CBM could be concerned with some very critical land acquistion near the clubhouse.  While no one knows, it is certainly a valid theory.

I wouldn't say MCC had no idea about how holes would fit on the property.  Although the Barker routing didn't cover the exact same piece of ground, it probably supplied ideas.   I can imagine CBM red marking, drawing lines, etc. in meetings of both June 10 and Feb 11, as part of a collaborative process with the committee, and that would certainly put him in part of the routing process. Like we have agreed, you and I may just have semantical differences, but it seems to me that the committee did most of the heavy lifting.  CBM seemed more like a teacher who teaches and then corrects the exam.....

To me, here are some unanswered questions that lead me to believe they didn't have anywhere near a final routing from CBM by the time of the plan you show, from Nov 1910:

If CBM was starting routing after June, why didn't he say that in his letter?  How can "I can't tell because I don't have a topo in front of me" be interpreted as you did, as "I'm starting a routing but I can't show it to you yet?"

If CBM did a routing prior to Nov 1910, why didn't it show on that map they showed the members for a vote?  Why was his name not on it?  Why would he spend time on a project of others BEFORE he was even sure if they would vote to acquire the land?

Since they documented other dealings with CBM, why would they not have acknowledged somewhere that he presented or mailed them a routing?

If the land swap occurred prior to Nov 1910, why wasn't that road alignment shown on the map the members used to vote?  Why did the board vote only in April on it, even though they had plenty of opportunities to do so earlier?

If there were routings that were pretty well fleshed out, why did MCC take many to NGLA in Feb, and do five more in April?  Why did CBM choose among those routings?

All in all, if CBM did a routing it had a half dozen chances to show up in the contemporaneous record, but it failed to do so each and every time.  How could that be?

Lastly, while you chide us for speculating about anything, isn't all of the above in your response to me speculation of how CBM MIGHT work at Merion?  Add in your interpretation of the MCC report from NGLA where you interpret their statement that they went to look at “his plans and data from courses overseas” to  “his plans for MERION and data from courses overseas” and it gets hard to put the peices together for me.  Lastly, even above, you state as fact that there was numerous correspondance between CBM and MCC in 1910, but I don't recall that ever being proven, so I consider that to be speculation, as well.

Simply put, I still believe that he primarily went there to advise on whether overall the land was a good deal, and what it would take to fit a golf course on there, etc. and as the record has reflected.  Now, there may be some gray areas between assessing the land and routing, and that is what you seem to be saying.  And, I can agree that someone somewhere gave some thought to golf holes before the purchase.   I believe it was very general in nature, such as making sure the land was at least two holes or 4 holes wide, and with suitable length to get that 6200 yard course on the property.  And, I agree CBM did that.

Again we are back to the semantic disagreement of whether CBM every put pencil to paper (which I doubt) in a way detailed enough to be called a routing.  My reading of the record says no, and that almost all of the routing came after the topo maps arrived in Jan 11, but that his advice was still, nonetheless valuable, and in large part formed the final shape of Merion.  And of course, the biggest MCC tribute to CBM was the fact that they attempted to follow his model for course creation as close as they could, given different circumstances to a degree.

So, we agree CBM was invaluable, but not that he ever did a routing.  In my mind, it doesn't really matter just how much No. 2 pencil he used on Merion's behalf.  I believe that is contribution was substantial, and has been hashed out enough and is close to correct, whether he ever did put 18 lines on a piece of paper or not.  I doubt that our two opinions will ever get any closer together than that!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Herrmann,

Could you answer the questions posed in reply # 161

Thanks

[Dan Herrmann]

Patrick,
Yes, I've been to Sand Hills, and saw the Constellation Map.  It's a beautiful piece of art and of GCA history, and it stands out as a highlight to a fabulous visit.

As to the other question in #161, my point is that CBM seems to have acted as a friend or a consultant on the routing and probably wasn't seen again.  The design, in my opinion, is much more than a sketch of a routing (if he even did that), and the design is Wilson's with a lot of work by Flynn.

To cut to the chase, I agree with Jeff's post #165.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan,

What's always surprised me about this/these issues is the inclination to dismiss CBM's continued involvement in the sole context of his personal visits.

As I pointed out years ago, the telephone was a modern convenience circa 1910-12-16, and the lines between New York and Philadelphia, fully operational.  Hence, it's almost impossible to conceive that CBM and the parties at Merion weren't in communication with one another via the telephone.

Do you think that Tom Doak never spoke to Mike Keiser via the phone ?
That Coore & Crenshaw never spoke to Roger Hansen via the phone ?

The complete dismissal of any communication via telephone between CBM and the parties at Merion seems almost inconceivable.

And, if I recall correctly, those denying communication via the telephone, asked, where are the written records ?

Since when are phone conversations transcribed ?

Letters are written documents.
Phone conversations are oral exchanges not prone to being transcribed.

Stating that CBM was never heard from again, because he didn't return to the site, is hardly a scientific proof.

Somewhere along the line, "probability" has to be factored in.

And, I find it improbable to unbelievable to impossible that CBM never talked to the parties at Merion via the phone.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,
Yes, I've been to Sand Hills, and saw the Constellation Map.  It's a beautiful piece of art and of GCA history, and it stands out as a highlight to a fabulous visit.

Then ask yourself this.

Why would you expect CBM's routing to contain the detail not found in C&C's Constellation Map ?

As to the other question in #161, my point is that CBM seems to have acted as a friend or a consultant on the routing and probably wasn't seen again.  The design, in my opinion, is much more than a sketch of a routing (if he even did that), and the design is Wilson's with a lot of work by Flynn.

To cut to the chase, I agree with Jeff's post #165.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

Agreed to a point, but the MCC minutes surely would have documented any work product CBM gave them, like a routing. 

[DMoriarty]

Dan Herrmann,

I'll be glad to continue to try and answer your questions, despite your discourteous  (and now deleted) comments a page back.  But first, could you please do me the courtesy of answering a few of mine?   

You have stated again and again that Wilson designed the course with help of Flynn.  Let's take a closer look at Wilson's involvement up through April, 1911 when CBM/HJW reexamined the land (and the five plans as laid out upon it) and determined the final layout plan . . .

1. What was said at the time about Wilson's involvement in the design process pre-April 1911?  Is there anything from this time period even indicating that Hugh Wilson was even involved in the initial design process at Merion East? 

I don't doubt that he must have been involved in the spring of 1911, but I'd like to see the documents from this time period so indicating.  Are there any newspaper accounts from this time period documenting Wilson's involvement?  Golf magazine Articles?  Board Minutes?  Club correspondence to the Members?  Ag. letters to/from Wilson specifically referencing the design process?  Any Wilson routings or plans?  Anything at all?

2. Since you have been posting Board minutes . . .  do the Board minutes  from 1910-1911 ever specifically mention Hugh Wilson's involvement in the design process?  If so what specifically do they say?

You keep throwing Flynn in the broth as well, so you might as well answer the same questions regarding Flynn's involvement (or lack thereof) through April 1911.

Thanks.

[DMoriarty]

 Jeff,

Thanks for your post 165 above.  I am glad we are at least in agreement that CBM and/or others had to have been giving some thought to how the holes would fit on the property during this early stage in the planning.  

Let me try to address some of what you see as unanswered questions.

1. You ask why CBM's routing did not show up in his June letter?   CBM answered that one-- Merion had not yet provided him with a contour map!  We know that sometime between June and February they got that contour map that CBM needed.

2.  You seem to have the idea that I think there was a detailed "final routing" plan in place before November.   I don't. I think there had been rough routings, including Barker's, CBM/HJW's, and the Francis modifications.  Enough to give Merion confidence they could proceed with the purchase, but not a final, detailed plan.

3.  Likewise, you keep suggesting that there must have been some sort of formal submission of such by CBM/HJW.  I don't know if/when they sent something or not, because I don't know when CBM/HJW got the contour they needed.   All I am saying is that early on they must have communicated to the site committee how they envisioned the  holes fitting on the property.  

This could have been quite rough and probably was.  For example, they could have been pencilling right on the Barker plan, or they could have drawn it in the dirt, or they even could have explained it at the end of the day or while they were walking around the property.  Or they could have discussed it with them after they had inspected the property. My point is simply that they had to have had some idea of how the holes would fit before they assured Merion that they would fit!

4. You wrote: If CBM was starting routing after June, why didn't he say that in his letter?  How can "I can't tell because I don't have a topo in front of me" be interpreted as you did, as "I'm starting a routing but I can't show it to you yet?"  

I think we need to be careful to get our facts straight about what he said and didn't say.   CBM did NOT say, "I can't tell you . . ."  Quite the opposite.  He said, "[W]e are of the opinion that it can be done . . ." He had the caveats about needing a contour map and them needing the land by the clubhouse, but he nonetheless told them he thought the holes would fit!   This is a big difference, and the difference between him already having considered the routing, and him not having considered it at all.

5. You ask why CBM's routing didn't show up on the Nov. 15, 1910 map?   A few possible reasons:
   -- We can't say for certain, but the map looks to have been created by the land company, not Merion.  Note that it not only covers the golf course property but also the development area north of College Avenue, and it even includes two carve outs along Turnbridge for property that had already been sold by HDC.  This sort of detail has nothing to do with Merion or the golf course, but is the type of detail one would find on a promotional plan for the development.
   -- While rough routings existed at this time, there were still plenty of details to be worked out.  For example it is not clear that CBM had seen/approved the proposed Francis swap yet.

6. You get into some speculation about board votes and road alignment and none of it makes much sense to me. I am not going to reargue the Francis swap except to say that according to Bryan's measures there was room in that northern portion for the 15th green and 16th tee.  Besides, if the swap hadn't yet occurred that land shouldn't be included in the golf course at all.

7.  You state that there were "a half dozen" opportunities where a CBM routing would have shown up if it existed.  This is not at all supported by the record.  We have no plans from anyone, but we know plans existed, even the records from this early stage are extremely spotty.   Yet what we do have points to CBM/HJW.   About every time the design comes up, CBM/HJW are being discussed.   Nothing about Wilson, though.  Just reference after reference to how CBM/HJW are instructing them "as to what could be done" on the property, and repeated references as to how they were following that advice.

Here are a few questions for you, Jeff.  

1. Could you point me toward any specific references of Wilson's involvement from the pre-April 1911 record of his involvement?[/b]  Specifically.
2. Could you point out the routing plan(s) Wilson created?  Surely if you expect CBM's to have shown up in the record, then Wilson's should have shown up as well, right?
3. Could you point me to how Wilson helped configure the land? Or how Wilson added the small parcel behind the clubhouse? Or how Wilson was in a position to add the Dallas Estate property (the site of what would become Merion's Redan, Road Hole, and a reportedly utilizing a "bottleneck" for strategic purposes?)
4.  Could you describe for me what if anything Wilson contributed to any of the five plans/options CBM considered in April 1911, and separate out for me what in these five plans (which were likely just variations) were provided by CBM had given at NGLA a few weeks before, and which were the original ideas of Wilson and his committee?

It is easy to demand ever increasing levels of specificity regarding CBM's involvement.  But the fact of the matter is that the record is relatively thin during this time period and we don't have a lot of the details as to how the design was worked out.  But, what we do have POINTS TO CBM/HJW.  And not Wilson.

[DMoriarty]

Patrick,

Agreed to a point, but the MCC minutes surely would have documented any work product CBM gave them, like a routing.  

Jeff,

You seem to have forgotten about the final routing plan as determined from the various options (five different "plans") by Macdonald and Whigham in April 1911. That plan, as determined and approved by CBM/HJW, was apparently included in the minutes.  (And lets not forget that, according to Alan Wilson, CBM and HJW had been of the greatest help and value in creating whatever was being considered in April!)

What more could you expect in terms of documentation of work product, other than the final layout plan?

If you are insisting that, in addition to the final layout plan, that there should be some early routing as well, then I think you are creating an artificial hurdle for proof here Jeff.  We don't have any of the various routings or plans, and we know that CBM was dealing directly with individual members of the Site Committee (Lloyd, specifically) and not directly with the Board.  Given the spotty record during this period, I don't think it reasonable for you do insist that an early routing would definitely have shown up in the Minutes.  

Apply your same standard above to Wilson or anyone at Merion, and see what happens . . .

[Dan Herrmann]

Patrick - I think the difference between C&C's constellation map and the services provided by CBM were that C&C went on to design and build Sand Hills, which CBM didn't do at Merion.

David - I deleted that previous post because it didn't add to the discussion.   But lighten up, it was meant to express frustration, but I tried to throw in some humor.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.   

As far as Flynn goes, I don't think he had involvement before 1911, but there would be no Merion East without William Flynn.

As far as your questions go, I think you know better than anybody that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to prove a negative.