[DMoriarty]

Also Mike,  I think you inadvertently forgot to answer my question about the timing of the "survey for golf purposes."

When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed for golf purposes? Was it before they roughly routed the course?  After they roughly routed the course?  

[Bryan Izatt]

Sven,

The source for these quotes is CBM's piece in Piper and Oakley, something I recommended you read (or reread) quite a few pages back.

Yes, you did.  And, now the quotes are here.

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven,

In December after the option was completed Macdonald was quoted as saying the land he secured was 2 miles long and 4 acres wide, which makes up approximately 200 acres.

How much do you think those straight western boundary lines deviate from being 4 acres wide to their eastern counterparts across the property?   Again, metes and bounds would be nice to see but it looks pretty consistent throughout, no?

And your point is?  That his rough estimate of what he thought they would use ended up matching up pretty closely to what they eventually procured?

Seems to me the course was pretty much routed at that point, which is what I've been saying all along.  Makes a lot more sense than saying they thought they needed 200+ for a golf course and housing, and they completely missed the boat on including enough room for 60 (or 70) 1.5 acre plots.

Sven

[Bryan Izatt]

I did notice the "tracing" story.  What do you suppose the "tracing" was?  Was the draftsman creating a copy of an existing document?  Or, was he creating the tracing that would be used to create the blueprint?  Or, something else ...........

I briefly looked into what "tracing" meant in those days, and it seems it was the process of copying a previously existing document onto tracing paper.  (Then a blueprint could be created from the trace.)

So there was a previously existing drawing, apparently referred to on the invoice as "the property, Shinnecock Golf Club."

I looked it up too.  Tracing could also mean that an original could be created on tracing paper so that a blueprint could be created from it.  It could (speculation) be that Macdonald hired him to create the original drawing that was used to create the blueprint and that he drew it based on a rough sketch from Macdonald.  

As an aside, what I read said that blueprints were not very good as working drawings because making notes or changes on them were not very effective because of the blue background.

From CBM's 1914 Golf Illustrated article on the Sahara hole, there was this picture of the model.  At the bottom it attributes the surveying and modelling to one "Oscar Smith".  Yet another person to add to the possible surveyors list.  Is it possible that CBM didn't do a topo survey until after the holes were built?  Could he have been working on the ground and using just the blueprint and centerline elevations?

[MCirba]

Also Mike,  I think you inadvertently forgot to answer my question about the timing of the "survey for golf purposes."

When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed for golf purposes? Was it before they roughly routed the course?  After they roughly routed the course?  

Sometime after Macdonald had him first make a survey of "our Sebonac Neck property", which sounds probably post-option but could have been sooner, he had him make a contour map and later gave him the surveyor's maps from abroad, "telling him that I wanted those holes laid ut faithfully to those maps."

Tell me how you define "roughly routed" and I'll try to answer.

[DMoriarty]

Tell me how you define "roughly routed" and I'll try to answer.

To me roughly routed means determining the shape of the golf course, the approximate starting and ending points, the turning point (if out and back), and many of the actual green sites.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Why is it that ONLY two roads appear on this blueprint ?

The road crossing the 8th & 11th fairway and White's Lane which enters the property by the 13th green and goes to the maintenance area next to the 6th green.

Where are all of the other roads that Bryan clearly indicated, running through the property ?

I guess that they never existed as Bryan indicated.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Great stuff, guys.   I think we're getting there, although some still may not quite agree but I think the pieces are coming into place.

Mike,

By "there" do you mean you're predisposed and predetermined conclusion ?

Before I respond to David's timeline questions, please take another look at the blueprint.

I did and noticed that none of Bryan's roads exist.   




Please note that the western border, seen in this view along the right side, is a series of straight lines, first out from the area of the Shinnecock Inn, then turning down towards Bullshead Bay where he had located land and water for his Eden and Cape, then almost mirrors and parallels the shore line from thereon, making sure to grab the land of the Alps, before turning again along the length of Peconic Bay.

Mike, let's not forget that this is a "blueprint", not a survey.

All straight lines.   No fairways defined.   

Another falacious conclusion on your part.
The fairways, generous as they were are defined by the bunkering schemes and the green sites.
While they're not precise, the playing corridors are clearly in evidence to all but those in denial.

Turning at places to parallel the water.   
A routing that goes out and back and grabs those natural features CBM said he identified on his horseback rides.

I think we're getting there.

Again, Mike, I have to ask, where is "there" ?

[DMoriarty]

I looked it up too.  Tracing could also mean that an original could be created on tracing paper so that a blueprint could be created from it.

This sounds odd to me.  Can I have a link to your source where you got this information, so I can understand it?.  My understanding is that traces were used for creating blueprints, but that they themselves were generally created by "tracing" an underlying document.

It could (speculation) be that Macdonald hired him to create the original drawing that was used to create the blueprint and that he drew it based on a rough sketch from Macdonald.

If the "draftsman" was hired to create an "original" drawing, then what is the source of that drawing?  He charged for "a tracing" not a survey. Surveying was not tracing.

ADDED LATER:  I see now I misread what you wrote.   My mistake.  I agree that it could be based on a rough sketch from Macdonald, although I'd assume tracing was involved.   My point is that had to have been a separate source, but we seem to be in agreement an that.

Is it possible that CBM didn't do a topo survey until after the holes were built?  Could he have been working on the ground and using just the blueprint and centerline elevations?

It seems possible.  And I think it probable that he figured out the rough routing before any detailed contour map was created.  I think we learn this from the blueprint with the straight line elevations.   (This is consistent with what CBM said in Dec06 - he mentioned the contour map and model would be used to guide construction.)  The routing came before the contour map (if one was even ever done before construction.)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Also Mike,  I think you inadvertently forgot to answer my question about the timing of the "survey for golf purposes."

When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed for golf purposes? Was it before they roughly routed the course?  After they roughly routed the course?  

Sometime after Macdonald had him first make a survey of "our Sebonac Neck property", which sounds probably post-option but could have been sooner, he had him make a contour map and later gave him the surveyor's maps from abroad, "telling him that I wanted those holes laid ut faithfully to those maps."

Tell me how you define "roughly routed" and I'll try to answer.

Mike,

Let me take a stab at that..

Macdonald stated that the sequence of events were as follows.

Macdonald discovers the 450 acre parcel.
Macdonald & Whigham spend 3 days inspecting the 450 acre parcel
The Company agrees to sell 205 of the 450 acres to CBM
CBM was permitted to select the 205 acres he wanted.
So, he subsequently reexamines the property with an eye toward accomodating the classical holes he had in mind (clear intent).
He determines the land he needs to accomodate his classical holes.
He stakes out that parcel of land.
He obtains an option on that specific parcel of land in 1906
He buys that parcel of land in the Spring of 1907.

Macdonald stated that Immediately after he took possession of the 205 acres, he begins "developing" his golf course.
Not designing it, but, developing it, building it.

Macdonald knew where he was siting his classical holes before he staked the land and he stated same, hence, I don't understand your contention that he bought the land and subsequently began his initial attempts to design the golf course.

There's no one that I know of who clings to that theory other than you.

[Patrick_Mucci]

All,

I have no idea if this is representative but here's a picture I took of a vintage photo from George Bahto's "The Evangelist of Golf".   That same angle photo from an even earlier pic appears in "Scotland's Gift" but that pic I took is too blurry to post here.   Perhaps someone with better skills can do so but to me it looks to be about the same height and thickness of growth.

Mike,

Here you go again.

You know that the land in the backround isn't the land that NGLA sits on.

I think it likely gives some idea of what the land off the golf course looked like as described by Macdonald, Travis, and others reporting later.  
I'm not sure but given the surveying method Jeff just described, it looks like it would have been a bear to do.

There were NO trees on the land at NGLA, your presentation is of dense woodlands.

That's a little disingenuous, don't you think ? 

If they did it that summer of 1906, I hope they brought the mosquito nets!  




I recall an old aerial of NGLA floating around here at one point.

I have that aerial and will send it to Steve Lang to post.  

It would be interesting to review to see how thick the growth was on adjoining land.

You have to separate coastal land from inland.

Why do you seem to ignore the paintings depicting the land at Shinnecock Hills that Steve Lang posted ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

After the fire, there was nothing there, and CMB did NOT want to be in the hash and beds business,

so he put his club in the middle of the (non-golfable) doughnut.[/b] 

At least IMHO.

Rich,

I've asked you several times, what made the land in the doughnut "non-golfable" ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

I also asked you how many times have you played NGLA ?

I'm trying to gain some context, some reference points in order to evaluate your response regarding your claim that the land that the current clubhouse sits on is/was "NON-GOLFABLE"

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,  I see now that I had misread your post on the "tracing" and have made an addition to my previous post.

[MCirba]

In December he described securing a property 2 miles long and 4 acres (roughly 280 yards) wide.

He was casting a big enough net around the landforms he wanted, the areas he wanted to go such as Peconic Bay, and I disagree that he had many greens it's determined by that time.

Interesringly, he wrote that 50 yard wide fairways were ideal.  One out, one back, a generous 50 yards between them and another 30 on each side still leaves 70 yards, or an acre deep along two miles.

[DMoriarty]

In December he described securing a property 2 miles long and 4 acres (roughly 280 yards) wide.

He was casting a big enough net around the landforms he wanted, the areas he wanted to go such as Peconic Bay, and I disagree that he had many greens it's determined by that time.

Mike, that description does not cast a wide enough net to include even the holes he had already mentioned.  The boundary is over 1300 ft. (433 yards) from the shore at the alps feature, and the alps feature barely fits the way it is.  That is about 6.25 of the square-acre-sides that CBM seems to like using as a measure.

As for your disagreement, you asked me what I meant by "rough routing" and I told you.

And you still haven't answered the question:

When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed for golf purposes?  Was it before they had found most of the green sites, or after?

[Steve Lang]

  I read that CH Sabin had his own back entrance from Bayberry Land property to NGLA and his own “caddy shack.”  I assume this is what was turned over to NGLA?


It’s interesting that there was a 20 ft topo map available from the USGS, from 1903 Survey and it doesn’t show much in the way of formal roadway paths.  Any field reconnaissance on horseback could have been used to add some more detail.  I see some high points...



Is it then funny that a published 1916 Road Atlas only shows one path to the NGLA Clubhouse?  And a second Atlas detail also shows the road along Bull Head Bay as does the USGS topo...

[Patrick_Mucci]

In December he described securing a property 2 miles long and 4 acres (roughly 280 yards) wide.

He was casting a big enough net around the landforms he wanted, the areas he wanted to go such as Peconic Bay, and I disagree that he had many greens it's determined by that time.

Mike, you can disagree all you want, Macdonald stated that he found a good number of his classic holes BEFORE he even staked the property.
He speaks of the ease in finding these holes.

Interesringly, he wrote that 50 yard wide fairways were ideal.  

That's a reasonable concept isn't it.

One out, one back, a generous 50 yards between them and another 30 on each side still leaves 70 yards, or an acre deep along two miles.

Let's be clear, this is your theory.
Would you apply your theory to the specific location of the mid-points in the DZ's of the 9th and 10th holes.

I measure the FAIRWAY widths in the DZ at 70 yards on # 9 and # 10.
What does that do to your theory ?

How about the FAIRWAYS at # 16 and # 17 which are 90 yards wide ?
What does that do to your theory ?

What about the swampy and/or hilly areas adjacent to the course ?
Say to the right of # 13 and # 14

You continue to take general statements and attempt to introduce them as factual.

All collies are dogs, but, you would have us believe that all dogs are collies, and that's where your logic continually fails.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve,

This is the extension of White's Lane that I referenced.

The original gates remain at the juncture of White's Lane and Sebonac Inlet Rd.

Thanks

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have only studied the map a bit, but what a neat thing to look at. I won't speculate on time, and of course, it was a working map used over several months. (surprised someone never tore it on a tree or fell in the mud. Yeah, maybe architecture has changed in 100 years, but that's what probably would have happened if I was carrying it around!

Two things strike me - he repeatedly called out those 5-6 holes, but was vague about the coast holes, other than he would have them.  Those six holes are designed in the most detail, while 1 and 18, maybe 2, don't even have clearly established centerlines.  It is clear he designed the course out from those six holes (again, all in the middle of the property)

Second, I notice a yellow line around the border near the first tee that later was bought for the pro shop. It appears that border troubled him somehow, as he noted it.  BTW, someone asked where that first pro shop was located, and the rendering in SG shows it just right of the first tee.

The maps do show different holes in various states.  The bunkers drawn in yellow pencil look pretty close on holes 3-9, most with additions later, but little on 10 (although two cross bunkers there look to still be in place) and 12-13. Not much on 15-18, or 1-2.  In general, it seems more bunkers got added later, and fairway bunkering is closer to the plan than what the greens ended up. For example, 9 green shows ringed with 5 bunkers, and seems to have ended up with less (looking at the SG rendering.)

It does show the whole process was far from linear in CBM's mind, with some holes close to final designs while others haven't even been finally routed. I think that suggests it will be hard to pinpoint what was done when, although, an initial date on the plan would help.

It fascinates me, and I have some thoughts, but I won't share them, as I will surely be shot down as a moron.

Let's just hope the intrepid researchers keep coming up with new stuff.

[MCirba]

If you're still at four acres wide down the length of two miles the day you sign the papers to secure 200 acres that tells me a lot.

[Steve Lang]

  Mike,

Not sure what point you're making...  200 vs 202 or 202 vs 205, that's ~ 99% accuracy for a literal description. Pretty good for a time when surveys were sometimes in significant error.

2   MILES
5280   FT/MILE
   
43560   FT2/ACRE
208.7103   FT/SIDE
   
4   ACRE WIDE
834.841   FT WIDE  (12.65 survey chains wide)
   
8815924.152   FT2 for straight line, 2 mile @ 4 acre wide
   
43560   FT2/ACRE
===================   
202.385   ACRES

[DMoriarty]

Mike is not sure what point he is making either, but whatever it is, he is sure it must mean that CBM couldn't have staked out the boundaries in the fall.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I have only studied the map a bit, but what a neat thing to look at. I won't speculate on time, and of course, it was a working map used over several months. (surprised someone never tore it on a tree or fell in the mud. Yeah, maybe architecture has changed in 100 years, but that's what probably would have happened if I was carrying it around!

Two things strike me - he repeatedly called out those 5-6 holes, but was vague about the coast holes, other than he would have them.
Jeff, that's not accurate, he went into detail on the "Cape" hole, and the "Leven" hole.
Other than 18, they're really the only "coastal" holes on the property, unless you include the "Eden" which he mentions.
"Narrows" and especially "Punchbowl" are inland holes

Remember, "Leven" was one of his ideal holes.

The "Bottle" hole was also one of his ideal holes.

So, you have # 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14 and 17 at the very least.

I'm trying recall if the 11th and 12th at NGLA resembled any of his other ideal holes.

But, armed with those nine holes and the starting and finishing points, the routing is all but set in concrete. 

Those six holes are designed in the most detail, while 1 and 18, maybe 2, don't even have clearly established centerlines.  It is clear he designed the course out from those six holes (again, all in the middle of the property)

Second, I notice a yellow line around the border near the first tee that later was bought for the pro shop. It appears that border troubled him somehow, as he noted it.  BTW, someone asked where that first pro shop was located, and the rendering in SG shows it just right of the first tee.

The maps do show different holes in various states.  The bunkers drawn in yellow pencil look pretty close on holes 3-9, most with additions later, but little on 10 (although two cross bunkers there look to still be in place) and 12-13. Not much on 15-18, or 1-2.  In general, it seems more bunkers got added later, and fairway bunkering is closer to the plan than what the greens ended up. For example, 9 green shows ringed with 5 bunkers, and seems to have ended up with less (looking at the SG rendering.)

It does show the whole process was far from linear in CBM's mind, with some holes close to final designs while others haven't even been finally routed. I think that suggests it will be hard to pinpoint what was done when, although, an initial date on the plan would help.

It fascinates me, and I have some thoughts, but I won't share them, as I will surely be shot down as a moron.

Are you qualified to make that evaluation ?

Let's just hope the intrepid researchers keep coming up with new stuff.

Agreed

[DMoriarty]

Jeff Brauer,  I am looking a scan of the blueprint from George's book and it looks to me like much of the top (N) of the blueprint has deteriorated and is nearly indecipherable.  But it looks to me that there were/are markings, including and features and greens and possible centerlines.  It is tough to make out, but it looks like about the same amount of detail as the rest of the course.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()