Pat Mucci responded;
"But, let me see if I understand you.
Crump builds the 18th green with an internal hump.
A hump that was his idea from concept through construction.
A hump that was in existance for many years before that noted architect John Arthur Brown decided to remove it.
And because I like what Crump put into the ground, what he conceived, built and maintained, I"m accused of having no concern or respect for historical documentation ? ? ?
You've got it all wrong.
John Arthur Brown and/or the club had no concern or respect for historical documentation.
Crump himself thought of the idea and he felt so strongly about it, that it was such a good idea, that he built that green in accordance with his concept of having a hump at it's center."
Pat:
If you care (which you probably don’t) to understand me, and PVGC, and the 1921 Advisory Committee, and the so-called “remembrances”, as they all apply to the “pimple” on the 18th green you should read my posts on page #3 as they apply to the importance and significance of those “remembrances”. For your benefit, I’ll quote them here as they pertain to the “pimple” on #18 green
Father Carr;
#18 hole;
‘He (Crump) always intended to modify the hump in the green into a heavy roll reaching to the right hand corner to give the player who sliced the ball onto the green a more difficult put (sic) than the player who plays straight to the center.’
W.P. Smith;
18th hole;
‘10/10/17 He will take out the hump on the green when he gets ready. He put it there to test if anything could be designed to penalize a sliced shot, the green being so large a bad slice might stay on it. He will put in a roll instead of a hump….’
Since George Crump never really recorded in writing himself his feelings about the golf course, apparently only telling some of his closest friends there which primarily were Carr and Smith, documentation of what he intended that hump or “pimple” on #18 green to be and what he intended to do with it doesn’t get much better and much clearer than that. If you’ll notice, Smith’s remarks appear to be perhaps in the form of a diary!!
Of course you can just tend to ignore it or discount it if it doesn’t suit your particular purpose but I don’t do that and apparently J.A. Brown and PVGC didn’t either. Obviously, if they removed it because they understood from this document that’s what Crump was going to do, I think perhaps they might have done a bit better job of doing what he wanted to do eventually on that green. I have no real idea if Brown actually referred to those "remembrances" when he decided to remove that "pimple"---he may not have---he may've just had it removed because by all reports it was a crazy feature. To say it was a penalizing feature for balls to the right of it if the pin was on the other side was probably an understatement and apparently Crump understood that and that was probably why he intended to replace it with a 'heavy roll' to the right corner as Smith explained (unfortunately that was never really done!).
The thing that most, certainly including you, don’t seem to understand about Crump and PVGC is a number of things he did on that course he, himself, considered to be temporary features that would serve until he had the time to go back and do them better. A number of those features he considered to be temporary were a number of bunkers that ironically are still on the golf course! There were apparently a number of mounds that he considered temporary features but most all of those were removed early, particularly on the recommendation of Hugh Alison in his hole by hole recommendation report to the club for the 1921 Advisory Committee---most of which recommendation from Alison were accepted by the committee and done.
Even a few greens and many features and contours of them he considered temporary and not good enough to remain---eg needing some form of alteration or even to be moved or removed. This included green #3, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #11, #12, #17 and #18! Many of those greens were redone in one form or another mostly by Alison and then Perry Maxwell a bit later.
Again, you may not care or have any respect for that documentation but PVGC and the 1921 Advisory Committee certainly did as they were attempting to finish that golf course as best they could determine what Crump would have and wanted to do. They had that much respect for Crump and what he’d done for them with that golf course! And that was the reason they asked Carr and Smith to compile their “remembrances” of what Crump had discussed with them on a hole by hole basis. That document---Carr and Smith’s “remembrances” is the basis with which the 1921 Advisory committee worked with Alison and his hole by hole recommendation report to finish off the golf course in 1921 and 1922 (a few things being finished a few years later, and even a few things that were approved never being done!).
Again, perhaps you don’t care about documentation like that if it doesn’t suit your particular purpose today but I don’t feel that way. When you’re lucky enough to have good historical documentation I believe you should consider it very carefully, use it and follow it if you have respect for the man responsible for the golf course if it’s a good golf course----and the world’s #1, PVGC, certainly is that.