So 17 never existed in 1916.

I'm having a hard time believing that Wilson would make a golfer walk all the way through the valley on today's #17 just to get to the 18th tee.  Is there a possibility that the yardages and pars are wrong?

Joe,  can you post the entire article?  I'd like to read it in it's entirety.

Mark

Mark,

Yes, it definitely seems to be a routing glitch (which thankfully was soon rectified by creating the 17th!  ), but the article is pretty clear.

It is almost illegible and I had to bring it up to 200% size on PDF to read it.   Still, even then it's a challenge.

If you shoot me your email I'll forward you a copy.

Joe,  can you post the entire article?  I'd like to read it in it's entirety.

Mark

Send me your e-mail addy and I'll send you the PDF. I don't know if there are reproduction rights for this article so I don't want to post it.  BillH, send me your e-mail as well.  Heck, anybody that wants it contact me and I'll send it along.

 

 Did you catch the statement that for #4 you cross the creek twice?

This is amazing!  I would have never guessed that 17 was not original.  Joe, well done and thank you for bring light to this.  

Now here's the question.  Can we find the site of the new original 14th green?

Mark

Why was the green for the lost #13 not set on the creek like the current 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th holes?  It seems like a par 5 with the creek meandering down the entire left side and a green set where the current batting cages are makes for a better hole (think a longer version of #5 at Merion).  Couple that with the next tee located in the current parking lot and it becomes more walkable.  Is it possible that green was moved up the hill at some point?

I knew Mr. Wilson wouldn't let that creek go unused in that corner of the property!

Great article, Joe!  I need some time to take this all in.

 Possibly there were  a few too many fronting creeks on the par threes in the original. But, some holes would have been veeeery good. #3 already known as a wonderful short hole , #5 as a unique par four in the way the creek is used , #6 a classic uphill par four , #7 we already know its appeal; it is often seen as the best hole now but back then had tough competition!! ,#9 would use the slope in a very appealing way for the drive to a green we already love , #10 would rival #10 at Rolling Green!!!, #11 would be all world , requiring three well struck shots and the proper use of the slope to run the ball on the green , #12 would be relatively common today but a memorable one then, as the article says ,how good was #13 ? was it like #12 at Torresdale or #9 at North Hills with an angled carry , we can only speculate on #14, and the remaining holes #15 ,#16 , and the approach to #18 are already fun as we play them today.


   The title of the article says it all---

   " One of the finest and best laid out in the country"

It would take an amazing hole to remove #17 in my mind.  it would have to be almost twice as good because the course becomes less walkable.  Keep in mind, the lost par 3 was gone by the time the '28 Public Links came around only 12 years later.  That was probably for a reason.

 If #17 is kept I get more interested that #18 tee should be just in back of #17 green  with a blind tee shot down into the valley for that tricky approach to #18 green. It also would eliminate that long walk to #18 tee.

The big question is....Who designed today's #17.

I thought it was George Thomas Cirba-Fazio.  Mike's step grandfather.  

 That huge fairway that is shown on the 1930 photo is one of my favorite things about these old classic courses. If #18 tee created a blind tee shot with Joe's safety issues addressed for Karakung it creates some interesting outcomes for the drive. If you don't catch it you are on the downslope;if you miss it right a wider fairway pushes you farther right and farther from the hole.

Would it be unreasonable to assume the Philly Inky actually has those original photos used in that article?  Or at least the negatives?  Any GCAers have an 'in' with that outfit to investigate?

 I think the present #8 green was #13 green

  The article says the #14 green was near McCall at the end of the property.
     #15-#16-#17 original as you said.
 Statement in article that #18 tee was near Arch St., which I interpret to somewhere left of current #11 tee. Article says you had to walk down in the general direction of present #17.