Boy - I'm sure glad someone gifted me the golf at Merion book they sell in the pro shop -- I would have felt like I wasted my money on all but a picture book after reading these threads!

"Also, I think you should make clear that the bolded "big problem on our hands" that Wilson was referring to when he wrote Piper and Oakley was agronomic, not architectural."

MikeC:

Even you may not fully realize the significance of what you just said there. There is no question in my mind---none---that this fundamental point and fact is being almost totally missed and misunderstood here on this website. It's a damn shame too, in my opinion, because the failure on here to even remotely appreciate that point and that fact is basically just continuing to skew an understanding of what was really going on back in that day with the likes of NGLA, Merion, Pine Valley et al, and the likes of Macdonald, the Wilsons, Crump et al.

Matter of fact, in one of the early drafts of Hugh Wilson's 1915 report he had a paragraph that dealt with his philosophy on bunkering and he Xed the whole paragaph out along with the notation "Probably better omit this as it comes more properly under Golf Construction".

How do you take this to mean:

Travis noted in Jan 1913 that “It is too early to attempt an analytical criticism of the various holes for many of them are but rough drafts of the problems."

Do you feel that he is talking about the strategy when he mentions, problems or do you think he is talking about the initial turfing difficulties, or is he being critical of the original architecture, which should always veiwed as a work in progress? (especially when they are treading grounds of architecture that have never been treaded before.)

David,

You wrote, "Travis also described a number of features on the East course which were based on what Hugh Wilson had seen in Europe.  Since Travis dated this trip after the course was seeded, these features were apparently created after the trip but before the opening.  For the most part, these features are the type which may have been completed during seeding:  

-“Many of the imported ideas of hazard formation are good
-“The grassy hollows of Mid Surrey have been well introduced.
- Something growing on the mounds "which looked suspiciously like the bents of Le Touquet.”  

I think that possibly the very last quote might have the most significance in this discussion. It may actually provide the answer to the conundrum prersented by all of the questions in all of the threads, that is:

1- Was Wilson's brother mistaken in what he wrote about the date?
2- How many trips did Wilson take to Europe?
3- If there were 2 trips, what were the purposes for each?
4- Exactly how, when and by whom was Merion constructed?

Look at that last phrase where Travis wrote that he noticed "Something growing on the mounds "which looked suspiciously like the "bents of Le Touquet.”

Could this be what actually happened:
1- Committees formed to find and buy land and oversee the design and construction of the new course.
2- Committee spends short time with CBM at National and get his advice on how to proceed.
3- 1910, HUGH Wilson goes to GB & I for nearly 7 months and returns after studying courses and holes.
4- After he presents reports and documents to the committee empowered to design and construct the course, they follow Wilson's views that become the actual design of Merion.
5- A major problem arises between the time of the course seeding and its opening, one of an AGRONOMIC Nature.
6- Wilson, represnting both Merion and the construction and design committee, begin what would be a long series of letters (as Tom Paul says they number into the 1,000's) discussing these problems and how to cure them.
7- In 1912, Wilson decides that a real potential cure would be to go back to Europe and obtain samples of seed and actual turf to bring back for use at Merion.
8- Hence that explains the comment Travis wrote about "Something growing on the mounds "which looked suspiciously like the "bents of Le Touquet.”

Admittedly it is pure speculation , but it certainly fits the many of the facts and several of the suppositions quite well.

Tom, is there any mention made by anyone as to Wilson, or anyone else, ever bringing back seed or turf samples for use at Merion?

Jeff,

That golf in November is at the original course. The East course did not open for another year (Sep. 1912). That point of that item is to locate Hugh Wilson at that (approximate) date for purposes of determining when he might have traveled overseas.

I agree that Merion was very much a work in progress, I havent gone back to check, but I seem to recall that in 1916 in US Am previews, they were still talking about adding bunkers to Merion.  the underlying question I guess, is whether this was intentional or accidental.

DM,

In two of my previous posts on the topic,  I noted an article by Tillinghast about Merion East in the American Golfer April 1916.  Tillinghast relays what Hugh Wilson told him about upcoming intentional changes.

"  The east course, selected for the meeting, offers some mighty fine golf, without freak holes. The nearest approach to freakishness is to be encountered on the eighth, which was constructed for a well-placed tee-shot, followed by a ticklish pitch and run to the green, which is not above criticism.  Fortunately this hole is to be reconstructed for the Championship, and when the putting-green is elevated and a deep hazard placed in front, the approach will be very different, as it will demand a controlled pitch. This change on the eighth is the only one of importance, although Mr. Hugh Wilson states that the seventeenth green will be lifted in the spring, and numbers of new hazards placed. Undoubtedly the east course at Merion will be found most satisfactory by the contestants for the title, although possibly some may think that boundaries are rather numerous.  Naturally a description of Merion will be of great interest generally, not only to those who anticipate competing, but to the thousands who will follow the play through the columns of the press, and consequently later in the season it will give me much pleasure to describe this very interesting course in detail.

By  HAZARD   "

As for the Behr comment, there are no facts to add.   You interpret this to be about how Wilson designed the course, I dont.  But it doesnt matter because that is a question of intepretation and is not even in dispute.    What else is there?  Behr said that Wilson was  a committee of one.    TEPaul doubts that he knew enough to say this with any authority, but even if he did, so what?   Personalities are not at issue.  What happened is.   Behr says Wilson studied hard.  He most obviously did.   But again, not really on topic.  

You interpet the Behr piece a certain way.  But that does not make it a fact.

David,

Please re-read your casual, sloughed-off dismissal of what Max Behr wrote above, and then consider it in light of what I mentioned above about Behr's consistent use of "past tense" in 1914 to talk about the work and study already done by Wilson at Merion, as well as the fact that he listened to various source, sifted the info, and made his own decisions and then ask yourself why I question your objectivity.

I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around a few things. Any help appreciated:
1. What is the basis exactly for the long-held belief that Wilson took his trip to GB before the course was designed? Is there anything other than what Alan wrote?
2. Apparently Flynn and Pickering and their past experience has been considered of some help with Merion. When were they involved, and how is their impact balanced against what Alan calls Hugh's 'complete credit'?
3. Can we say the course was very good before Wilson's later trip that may have been documented by DaveM?

Tom,

Yes, it came to light on the original 50,000 post Merion thread that Whigham, in 1939 while eulogizing Macdonad listed a number of courses that were designed by "Macdonald/Raynor" which included "Merion Cricket Club".  

I'd go back and look up the exact quote except I'm afraid I might get lost in there and never find my way out!  

Tom,

It would totally make sense to overplay Macdonald's involvement.

Put yourself in their shoes.   Your burgeoning membership has appointed you and four equally inexperienced others to a committee to build them a new course.   What's more, the old run of the mill course won't do anymore, because several of your members are well-connected and quite aware of places like Myopia, and Garden City, and what's going on out at Oakmont, and Shawnee, and many vacation out in the Hamptons and have seen NGLA and the old Philadelphia inferiority complex is rearing its head and trying to stay competitive.

Worse yet, you have local golf writers like Tillinghast, and then Travis dropping by, and the whole golf scene on the eastern seaboard is like an 9th-month pregnant woman, just about ready to burst with new ideas and excitement and you're doing all you can to keep up and do right by your membership.

Someone, somewhere suggests that you should go see Charles Macdonald who is not only the most famous golfer in the country at the time, but who has also just completed the first iteration of NGLA to widespread acclaim.   You and your committee feel pretty ill-prepared for the task at hand, and the more you learn, the less you feel you know.   Macdonald is willing to meet with the lot of you if you come out to his place and host your overnight.   He's gracious, and still in that innocent stage of a man proud of his new creation and unburdened by future expectations.

You need "Street Cred", especially with the members back home, and you need to show progress.   So, you tell them that you've gone out to study with the great Macdonald at NGLA and his advice was of the highest order and value.   You tell them that he'd be happy to come out and check out the course the next summer, and give further advice.

Wouldn't this have given Wilson and his team instant credibility and added star power and incredible cache to the Merion project?

No longer was it just Hugh and his 4 Merry Men trying to come up to speed quickly and build a course that not only the members of Merion, but all of Philadelphia golf could be proud of?

No, instead, it's the Merion Committee, costarring the world Famous Charles Blair Macdonald and HJ Whigham, both former US AMateur champions, and fresh from their stunning success at NGLA.

Imagine today a bunch of guys in Peking building one of the first courses in mainland China, and they all of a sudden have the ability to get Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods involved in the project in an "advisory" way.   What do you think they'd do?

Tom,

Before we "Shanghai"  this thread, I was thinking more about a group of native, avid, relatively new Chinese golfers who formed a club with the idea of building a new golf course and were then part of a member-elected committee to go ahead and do it.   Let's also say that they were internationally well-connected and through the glories of multi-national trade and global peacekeeping efforts they somehow managed to wrangle through those connections some "advisory" time with a Tiger of Jack.  

Wouldn't those unknown Chinese pioneers trump up the involvement of those famed celebrities in every way possible?

Why would we think that Hugh Wilson and company would hae done any differently given the gravitas and celebrity of adding a Charles Blair Macdonald and an HJ Whigham to their project as "advisors"?