Unless, they were with the Dean's daughter.

Why the heck do you think CBM took on Raynor, or Langford took on Morreau, etc, etc.  

Weren't these associates more familiar with the can and can't do's concerning engineering of drainage, dredging, soil characteristics, survey, and all the technicalities that a blue blood society "committee appointed architect" didn't know beans about?

Are you referencing CBM as a blue blood society member who didn't know beans about engineering, drainage, dredging, soil characteristics, surveying and all of the other technicalities ?

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on December 28, 2006, 04:36:16 PM

The quote in "The Evangelist of Golf", states:

"We spent two days with Mr MacDonald at his bungalow near the National course and in ONE NIGHT absorbed more ideas on golf course CONSTRUCTION[/U] that we had learned in all the years we had PLAYED[/u]

It seems clear from the Wilson quote you provded, that ROUTING, feature and hole DESIGN were not the focal point of the meeting, rather the committee seemed to focus on CONSTRUCTION.

Patrick, like the bogey golfer (me) who only talks about a single birdie and forgets about the rest of the round, you are ignoring all but what you want the quote to say.   For example, in the first sentence which mentions M&W Wilson (the sentence before your sentence) states (my bolds):

"Our ideals were high and fortunately we did get a good start in the correct[size=4x] principles [/size] of laying out the holes, through the kindness of Messrs. C. B. Macdonald and H. J. Whigham."[/i]

David, again, in one night, how much could they absorb.
And, the direct quote is that they got a "good start".
I read that as just that, a primer,  101, a short, basic summary.[/color]
 
Then he wrote the single sentence you quote, but continued on to say:

"Through sketches and explanations of the correct [size=4x]principles [/size] of the holes that form the famous courses abroad and had stood the test of time, we learned what was right and what we should try to accomplish with our natural conditions. The next day we spent going over the course and studying the different holes.  Every good course that I saw later in England and Scotland confirmed Mr. Macdonald's teachings. May I suggest to any committee about to build a new course, or to alter their old one, [size=4x]that they spend as much time as possible on courses such as the National [/size] and Pine Valley, where they may see the finest types of holes and, while they cannot hope to reproduce them in entirety, they can learn the correct principles and adapt them to their own courses."

Wilson recommends spending as much time as possible at NGLA, yet, HE ONLY SPENT ONE NIGHT.
What can you lean in one night ?

How long did it take you to get through law school ?
One night ?
Would one night with Clarence Darrow have sufficed ?[/color]

He is talking about laying out the golf course.  Or, as Wilson says:  " . . the correct [size=4x]principles [/size] of laying out the holes."  

Moreover, he is not talking  in the abstract, but specifically talking about laying out Merion:  "the correct principles of laying out the holes."   ". . . we learned what was right and what we should try to accomplish with our natural conditions.

He's talking about the "PRINCIPLES".  NOT SPECIFICS

NOWHERE is there any reference to ANY specific feature or hole at Merion where CBM's imput was responsible for the routing, design or construction of that feature/hole.

He references the "principles" often.  How familiar was CBM with the terrain at Merion ?[/color]

Quote

Do you think, if you were a novice, that if you spent one night with Tom Doak at Sebonack, or Bill Coore at Hidden Creek, along with some other fellows, that your education on golf course architecture would be complete ?

Let's pretend we are talking about you, because I do not want to field the inevitable "you are so arrogant that you think you could have designed Merion" posts.  

No, but you would have "a good start" as to how to lay out the course, or at least the rough draft.[size=4x]

NO, you wouldn't[/color][/size]  

Also, it would probably be "of great help and value" if,  during the process, Doak or Coore also came to the site and gave you their advice and suggestions.

What advice and suggestions ?
There's NO RECORDED EVIDENCE of any specific advice or suggestions.
Are you sure that they didn't visit to inspect the progress and give the "Papal Blessing", and nothing more ?[/color]

Also, if Doak or Coore had taken a look at the site made sure it was suitable for golf (Tillinghast,) before you ever started, that would be of great help, too.  [note I am not sure yet whether this was the order, but most of the writings suggest that it was.]

It's hard to believe, especially in pre DEP days, that any site wasn't suitable for golf.  The entire area within 10 miles radius from Merion seems suitable for golf.[/color]

Quote

However, they had but one night to accomplish this.

And they learned more in that one night than the had in their previous lifetime of golf.  

Which proves my point about them being absolute novices.
It's like when I first met TEPaul, he knew nothing about GCA. He thought a bunker was where Hitler hid out, that a tee time meant 4:00 pm, and that a ball washer was one of the indentured servants, preferably female.[/color]

Quote

I also wonder, how much of the time was spent focusing on holes that CBM felt were worthy of exportation ?
His holes, borrowed from the principles gleened from the courses he studied and focused on in the UK.  
Or do you think he referenced, in that one short night, all of the holes he had encountered during his visit to the UK ?

You are still assuming that the purpose of the visit to NGLA was to prepare Wilson to go to Europe.  What evidence supports this assumption?   I do not know whether or the trip for Merion was in the works, or not.

I never made that assumption.
That's your conclusion.
My theory is that Wilson wanted to meet with CBM to obtain some general insight with respect to the project he was embarking upon. [/color]

Isn't it possible that it was during the actual "construction" process when Wilson realized how little he knew, and at this point he decided to complete the rough draft, sow the course, and then he head off you Europe after the new yearthe next year, during grow in?

Why would he go to the UK AFTER the golf course was routed, designed and constructed ?

What purpose would it serve ?

Would he return and state, "fellows, we got it wrong.  Rip it up and let's start all over again ?  Doubtful or Impossible ?
Take your pick[/color]

Quote

I have a hard time accepting that novices could absorb and comprehend the limited amount of knowledge that CBM could offer in a SINGLE night, and that the information provided by CBM's lecture was all encompassing and went directly into the ground at Merion.

It wasn't a single night, it was two days, plus at least one site visit during construction.  

No, it was one night in CBM's bungalow.
Wilson's quote is clear on that.
Travel time would preclude an early morning arrival and preclude a late departure.  I suspect that the time they spent together was rather limited.[/color]

And an earlier visit by CBM that probably occurred before the committee was formed.  This may not have helped them at the time, but it prepared CBM to cut to the quick during the NGLA meeting.

David, please, be realistic.
CBM is meeting with novices, individuals in the dark about GCA, and you think he's going to cut to the quick ?
Things don't happen like that in the real world.
One's ability to teach a group is governed by the weakest link's ability to comprehend, and given the limited time to impart his knowledge, I doubt that they walked away with the keys to the kingdom.[/color]

Quote

I think CBM, TD and BC were/are incredibly talented, but, I don't think spending one night with them would permit an intelligent person, familiar with GCA, to route, design and construct a golf course, let alone novices, unfamiliar with GCA.

This is where I think many are selling both CBM and Wilson short.   Apparently, many people believe that Wilson needed to go to Europe in order to learn to do what he did at Merion.  

They do not think he could lay out the course without that experience.  

I do not think this was necessarily the case, at least as it applies to the initial course.

David, think about what you just said.
That a novice, totally unfamiliar with the art of routing, design and construction, could create a golf course in a virtual vacuum.[/color]

With CBM's help, advice, and suggestions, he could have layed out the backbone of the course, then gone to Europe, then taken what he learned from MacDonald and what he learned overseas, and GRADUALLY altered the course until he was satisfied.

Think about what you just stated from the practical side.
Pretend for a moment that you're one of the interested members/investors.  Would you allow a process, such as the one you outline above, to take place ?  Who, in their right mind would ?  NOONE.

Why put the cart before the horse ?
Why roll the dice, especially if you're a novice ?

Are you familiar with the pressure related to the responsibility of creating a golf course for fellow members ?

Do you think he didn't care if he got it RIGHT the first time ?

That he had the luxury to do it over and over again until he got it right ?

Tell me what other golf course was designed under those conditions ?

You've taken your theory to a new level .... fantasy, wild fantasy.[/color]
   

Pat, I don't know, it is on page 21 of "The Course Beautiful".  what does it matter?  If it were written much later in the 20s or even when he was doing PGA reports in the 30s, he was all that much more experienced, and still had the good sense to yield to experts on the technicalities.

It matters because it provides context.
It also might matter because he could be referencing a specific site, like Atlantic Beach, Florida, which might have required extraordninary attention.

But Pat, while I'm too lazy to go out and extract all your quote snippets above, you keep stating things as if HIW and the committee folk were unfamiliar with golf in general.  Yes, they were novices in design and construction, but experts in playing.  

Like the PGA Tour Pros who design golf courses today ?

Palmer, Player, Casper, etc., etc..

How would you classify the bulk of their work ?

They sought out the advice of one of about 8-10 men that actually knew something about the origins of the game in Scotland, Scots as a matter of fact!  They knew how to hit shots, and what they liked in the first golf courses they found here in America, laid out by the likes of Bendelow and other early Scots, which were courses that were only 10-15 years old by then.  

I disagree with that.

Weather and soil conditions in the UK don't tranfer well to the U.S., and as such, the game had to take on a different flavor, a different modaliity.

But, they sought out the "experts" advice on origins of the playing strategy, how to lay out the holes, and left the technicalities to "experts" in constructors and engineers.

That's nonsense.
There were NO experts in the construction of golf courses in 1908-1912.

I really believe that much of what we can not now find as specifically written down by these men is because they just commonly assumed that experts would guide them in can and can't do issue while they waved their hands at the constructors as to creating their designs and translating them into the ground.  They didn't write more specifically about the role of the engineers, surveyors, growers, because it was a GIVEN that they would be needed!

What evidence do you have to substantiate your position ?

Review of the early turf problems experienced by these early courses would seem to refute your theory on the "expert" growers.  There were NONE

He probably further went on to advise (in my best Scotish brogue) 'Bah laddies, if ye wann' ta know ta rist a tae storie a gawf, ye must oblidge yerselvs ta maik a voyadge t' tae auld sod anna siek out tae wisdom of gawf in the kingdom..."  or something like that.

Pat, they were as expert as they could be with a field of GCA only 10 years or so old, here!  

That's my point.
They weren't experts, they were all novices.

By 1910 or so, Bende had about 150 golf courses under his belt.  

C&W cite about 45 prior to 1908 and most were 9 hole courses.

He, and a very few other Scots, had old world experience.

What kind of "old world experience" ?  Playing or designing ?


They were the only ones a neophyte like HIW could turn to for expert advise.

Are you suggesting that Wilson turned to Bendelow for advice on Merion ?

While playing as capt. of the golf team in about 1900, don't you think those fresh young American college boys were in awe of the old Scots that seemed to belong to the game, brought it here from the old country, and taught it to them?

Possibly

Don't you think a fellow like HIW had 'plenty' of conversations with Bende and others about the origins of the game, and how to bring it to more places in America, during his playing competitive as early as 1900?  

No, I don't.

Communications and travel in 1908 were rudimentary.
With Wilson in Philadelphia and Bendelow in NYC and Chicago, I don't think they had "plenty" of coversations.  I"d think that their conversations were rare, if any at all.

I'm only guessing, but I would think that the primary subject of conversations with the old Scots from the likes of HIW were about the ways to hit shots, then legend and lore of knowing old Tom and playing with him on TOC, and the old legend in their yout, before they came across the great water.  

In those days, the likelihood of conversation was primarily a function of class.  There were clear lines of demarcation between the various stratas.

These conversations were probably lubricated with plenty of Scotch.  

Since Bendelow NEVER drank alcoholic beverages I doubt that occured

Don't you think that once they got around to discussing how to build more courses here, the young American Ams were all in the dark, so they could only ask the old Scots, who could only tell them about problems and techniques they recently developed on the very few efforts to build courses here that they had in America.  

I don't believe that they had those discussions.

Golf Pros weren't allowed in the club houses and were regarded as second class citizens, hired help, as were green superintendents.  In the early 1900's I don't see young American Amateurs mingling with "employees", nor do I see them engaging in conversations that weren't directly related to instruction.

They could warn them of the pitfalls, but would probably tell them that the best way to understand much of this was to go to the old country and have a look.  

I don't know what the travel costs were around the turn of the Century, but, it's hard to imagine anyone but the wealthy taking a hiatus and sailing abroad for an extended period of time.

I don't know that those old "scots' knew how to build a golf course in America.  The soils, climate, turf and weather patterns weren't similar, and I don't know what experiences those pros would have in the area of construction.

And, make sure you have "experts" to help you translate your ideas!

What experts are you refering to ?