Merion East, 10th hole: Another Piece of the Puzzle?

« **Reply #900 on:** February 05, 2007, 01:59:37 PM »

Andy,

"Well placed", into the narrowest portion of the fairway, I might add. But you are definitely correct, from the slot in the right side of the fairway near the bunkers to a right pin the shot is not blind, but for the majority of approach shots I think it probably is. And besides, I don't know if it is, or even if it's close, I was really just asking because it's the only hole I've played in the States with a dune like that to carry. Thanks.

« **Reply #901 on:** February 05, 2007, 03:10:15 PM »

Sully:

The real reason I made that post about Myopia's "Alps" is that it preceded NGLA by a number of years and it was obviously pretty well known by top flight American golfers at the turn of the century. The point is some may've thought NGLA's "Alps" was the first of that type in this country because of Macdonald's GB template hole idea.

Apparently not.

Holes like Yeaman's "Alps" or any other Alps holes after NGLA's aren't so interesting to me as an influence on later holes of the type.

Another thing that interests me about Herbert Leeds is where he got his ideas and when. I know he was in GB in 1902 at least and apparently in England looking at architecture. I'd assume that put him in the Heathlands and as you can imagine I think that is most important to know as to early influences on American architecture.

Some obviously think Macdonald was the first positive influence for good architecture in America coming out of that 19th century "geometric" or "Victorian" golf architecture age but they seem to be forgetting about Leeds, and perhaps Emmet too, and they seem to be forgetting how significant Myopia (and GCGC) was considered back then by those in the know.

Leeds was in the same vein of Macdonald, Whigam, Wilson, Crump, Thomas, Behr, early Travis, early Emmett and early Tillinghast et al-----eg amateur "sportsmen" designers who spent years on particular projects. Leeds was into all kinds of things in sports--and good at them---football and baseball at Harvard, a very good yachtsman, card player, bridge player and eventually addicted to golf course architecture.

The interesting thing to me about Leeds is he came at least a half a decade or more before Macdonald and NGLA, and that could be significant seeing as how well respected Myopia was around the turn of the century.

« **Reply #902 on:** April 13, 2008, 08:16:34 AM »

Hugh Wilson vacationed in Massachusetts and likely saw Myopia Hunt Club very early on. The Lesley Cup was played at Myopia Hunt Club in 1910. If there was an Alps Hole at Myopia Hunt, it is very likely that it was known to Hugh Wilson prior to the construction of Merion East. Thus Tom makes an excellent point that if an Alps concept was applied to Merion East, it should not be a foregone conclusion that CB Macdonald was the point of origin.

« **Reply #903 on:** April 13, 2008, 10:49:33 AM »

Wayno,

I don't consider the words "likely" and "if" as fact based evidence.

That's conjecture on your part.

You're looking for reasons to refute the claim without presenting the evidence to support your refutation.

I think you have to view these issues with an open mind, one that's not predisposed to a predetermined conclusion.

You may recall that I initially contested the premise that # 10 was originally an "Alps" hole, but, I've seen so many variations of the CBM-SR templates, that I'm no longer willing to dismiss the categorization without exploring and researching the particular holes and their histories and the histories of the clubs and the related architects .... further.

Piping Rock is an interesting study in template holes with variations.

« **Reply #904 on:** April 13, 2008, 11:24:25 AM »

Wayno,

I don't consider the words "likely" and "if" as fact based evidence.

Neither do I, that's why I used those terms. What gives you the notion that I am presenting anything here as fact-based evidence?

That's conjecture on your part.

What's your problem? It is conjecture and that's how it was presented. Duh.

You're looking for reasons to refute the claim without presenting the evidence to support your refutation.

I think you have to view these issues with an open mind, one that's not predisposed to a predetermined conclusion.

Show me where I have a closed mind on the subject.

You may recall that I initially contested the premise that # 10 was originally an "Alps" hole, but, I've seen so many variations of the CBM-SR templates, that I'm no longer willing to dismiss the categorization without exploring and researching the particular holes and their histories and the histories of the clubs and the related architects .... further.

You've recently been privileged to view what is supposedly new information showing that most of Merion's holes are conceptual copies of holes in the UK. Bear in mind that not all of us have seen what you have and what you continue to keep to yourself. So if we are not as informed as you, do not accuse us of having a closed mind. We simply are not as informed as you. That's a scary thought

What research are you doing and on which particular holes, especially Alps holes? Is or was the current 3rd hole at Merion a Redan? Is the current 11th at Philadelphia Country Club a Redan? I'd like to know what your research findings are. So please report them as soon as you can and without building the anticipation levels to such heights, all for a grand entrance and to make others look ignorant.

« **Reply #905 on:** April 13, 2008, 12:41:36 PM »

From David Moriarty, Nov. 21, 2006:

"B Crosby asked:
What is the puzzle?

Well it probably depends upon who you ask. My puzzle was whether Merion (not the Haverford Merion) can be viewed as a rejection of what had been going on in Philadelphia, and a turn back to links inspired and heathland inspired courses.

Another puzzle was whether CB MacDonald and his work significantly influenced the design of Merion, and/or whether MacDonald actually advised on the project.

........."

« **Reply #906 on:** April 13, 2008, 12:50:50 PM »

Tom,

The answer to both of those puzzles is quite certainly yes, but probably not at all in the way David is thinking.

« **Reply #907 on:** April 13, 2008, 01:02:42 PM »

From David Moriarty, Nov 21, 2006:

"TEPaul,

1. I dont think anyone suggested that MacDonald designed the 10th hole at Merion East. I know I didn't.

2. Your word "evolution" implies that Merion East's roots were in the local golf landscape, but this doesnt seem to be the case at all.

3. There were plenty of golf courses in Philadelphia in 1910, and Wilson could have easily built a longer version in their style at the new Merion site. And you say yourself that Crump went to Europe to study because the local courses "weren't any good." What could be more of a rejection than these two prominent golf figures ignoring what was in their own back yard and instead traveling across an ocean to find something better?

3. You can call it "discovery" if you want to, but they would have had no need to go discovering if they were at all satisfied with the status quo. Based on what I have seen so far, Merion represented a significant departure from what had been going on in Philadelphia (and most of America) for over a decade."

What David Moriarty said above is interesting, and, I think, was the beginning of his interest in Merion's creation and probably his interest in Macdonald's part in it and influence on it.

When he said in #2 that my use of the word "evolution" implies roots were in the local landscape, I never, not ever, not at any time, meant to imply such a thing and if he thought I did back then he was simply mistaken.

He might've thought I implied that; he may still think I implied that but I can tell you that at no time in the last dozen years (when I got interested in classic architecture and its history) did I imply such a thing. I can even supply my own articles on and entitled the "Philadelphia School of Architecture" in magazines such as the GAP's Philadelphia Golfer and the 2005 USGA US Amateur Program that state very much the opposite---eg that in a few significant ways courses like PV and Merion done in the early teens very much were a rejection of the architecture not only around here but generally in America that had come before them.

The reasons for that are somewhat numerous, although they primarily concentrate around just a few primary reasons that are and have always been fairly well known and understood with people who study the history of golf architecture.

« **Reply #908 on:** April 13, 2008, 01:06:38 PM »

Tom,

I didn't even think that was ever in question.

If the place to find great courses in Philadelphia prior to Merion and Pine Valley was in Philadelphia, why would these guys have gone elsewhere to study?

Didn't we learn this in Cornish/Whitten 101 class back in 1985?

Beyond that, there was the larger problem for these guys that Philly had nothing approximating a "Championship Course", and after the advent of the Haskell Ball all of the older Philly courses were quite outmoded and actually being blamed by the golf cognescenti in Philly for the poor competitive showings of Philly golfer in regional and national competitions.

It's what fueled Cobb's Creek's creation, as well.

« **Reply #909 on:** April 13, 2008, 01:53:43 PM »

I've been scanning through this thread and there were some minor but civil disagreements on here of certain specific facts and some opinions but the very FIRST evidence I can see on here where this thread began to devolve in a bad and unfortunate direction was this from T MacWood on Nov, 27, 2006;

"I would strongly advise not arguing with TE or Pat on this subject. Based on their level of effort it is apparent neither has an interest in finding the truth."

Maybe he was trying to be funny and maybe he wasn't. He sure didn't use any emoticon. In my experience this is how these things began to devolve with him on numerous threads. His implication seemed to be that no one could research things like he did. And all this seemed to evolve over a disagreement of what people like Robert Lesley really meant when he described #10 as an Alps or whether it really was blind from the approach!

Are these the kinds of things the likes of MacWood and Moriarty from other states who hardly know Merion because one may've been there once but the other has never been there, should be fixating on and taking us to task over for disagreeing with each other or even them?

I don't think so but I do know that is precisely how and why most of these Merion threads devolved downhill with those two contributors.

« **Reply #910 on:** April 13, 2008, 04:04:27 PM »

Quote from: Wayne Morrison on April 13, 2008, 11:24:25 AM

Wayno,

I don't consider the words "likely" and "if" as fact based evidence.

Neither do I, that's why I used those terms. What gives you the notion that I am presenting anything here as fact-based evidence?

That's conjecture on your part.

What's your problem? It is conjecture and that's how it was presented. Duh.

You're looking for reasons to refute the claim without presenting the evidence to support your refutation.

I think you have to view these issues with an open mind, one that's not predisposed to a predetermined conclusion.

Show me where I have a closed mind on the subject.

You may recall that I initially contested the premise that # 10 was originally an "Alps" hole, but, I've seen so many variations of the CBM-SR templates, that I'm no longer willing to dismiss the categorization without exploring and researching the particular holes and their histories and the histories of the clubs and the related architects .... further.

You've recently been privileged to view what is supposedly new information showing that most of Merion's holes are conceptual copies of holes in the UK.

That's not what I've been privileged to view.[/color]

Bear in mind that not all of us have seen what you have and what you continue to keep to yourself.

Wayno, I was asked to agree to a "confidentialilty agreement" of sorts, as a condition of being provided privileged info. I gave my word and will continue to honor it. You may call that "keeping it to myself", but, I regard it as the proper thing to do.[/color]

So if we are not as informed as you, do not accuse us of having a closed mind. We simply are not as informed as you. That's a scary thought

That's true on all accounts [/color]

What research are you doing and on which particular holes, especially Alps holes? Is or was the current 3rd hole at Merion a Redan? Is the current 11th at Philadelphia Country Club a Redan? I'd like to know what your research findings are.

At the present time my research is confined to business projects.
I am beyond busy and don't have much time to pursue my hobbies as much as I'd like to.
[/color]

So please report them as soon as you can and without building the anticipation levels to such heights, all for a grand entrance and to make others look ignorant.

I can't help it if you and others are so impatient.
You'll just have to wait until David Moriarty is ready to present his findings and perhaps a premise to go with them.

I just came back from hitting balls for 45 minutes, was besieged to help my son with a school project.

YIKES, I JUST WANT TO WATCH THE MASTERS[/color]

« **Reply #911 on:** April 13, 2008, 04:12:14 PM »

The fact that there is a "confidentiality agreement" of sorts is probably the most absurd thing I've ever read on GolfClubAtlas.

Patrick, no offense to you...I know you're just trying to do the right thing and honor a secret promise on a subject you have interest in, but you're a stand-up guy and I find this "let's keep it from everyone til we're ready to spring it and make certain people look speculative and foolish" to be almost the height of infantilism.

I do hope fair-minded people on GCA can see this for what it is, without having to have been privy to the trail of behind the scenes private email, plotting, and intrigue.

What David is failing to realize however is that the world of GCA.com is amazingly small and interconnected.

« **Reply #912 on:** April 13, 2008, 04:23:56 PM »

A confidentiality agreement...behind the scenes emails.....plotting and intrigue...

Seems that the word "Club" in "GolfClubAtlas" has taken the lead role.

With all the authors we have in our midst, I'm sure a high tech, internet chat room suspense/thriller could be written with the current cast of Merion thread(s) characters in full utilization.

Keep going fellas, and you'll practically make the authors' ability a moot point.

Joe

« **Reply #913 on:** April 13, 2008, 07:55:33 PM »

"I was asked to agree to a "confidentialilty agreement" of sorts, as a condition of being provided privileged info. I gave my word and will continue to honor it. You may call that "keeping it to myself", but, I regard it as the proper thing to do."

Pat,

If that was what you were asked to do and you accepted, it is the proper thing to do. I would not have accepted such terms and simply waited along with everyone else, but I'm not going to argue with you about your decisions, especially your decision to keep your word.

I think it would have been best to put it all together and then come forward with a well thought out and well presented theory or theories. These proposed areas of analysis with such little support at this time is counterproductive. I would say this process was poorly managed from the start. Can I at least blame you for that?

« **Reply #914 on:** April 13, 2008, 08:00:34 PM »

Mike Cirba & Wayno,

Wayno, yes, you can blame me for that, I accept full responsibility.

Mike, David's work is not yet completed, hence, prematurely releasing his work would be a disservice to his efforts and to the work he hopes to present on GCA.com.

Let's give David the time he needs to complete and present his work.

I appologize for prematurely releasing info relative to David's work.

« **Reply #915 on:** April 14, 2008, 12:10:12 AM »

I believe I've found compelling evidence that Devereaux Emmet did most of the routing and design work at NGLA and the club and Macdonald conspired to minimize his architectural contribution to that seminal American design.

My "puzzle" is----was it Emmet who made NGLA's template hole drawings abroad?

That might be my "hypothesis" and I believe I can prove this because I've found about five ship manifests for D. Emmet (single), (American) who the manifests show was accompanied each time in his cabin on each trip by a pack of GB hunting dogs. The latter "fact" virtually proves it was GCGC's Devereaux Emmet and he should at least share design attribution for NGLA with C.B. Macdonald.

This "fact" should prove that compared to the rest of you half-assed researchers I do a lot more digging than you do. Or was the digging done by some of those Irish hunting dogs?

Whatever.

I will complete my research and produce my work in at least a year and a half but if anyone says I promised it I will deny that. Furthermore, I want a "confidentiality agreement" with anyone who reads this until I produce my "work."

« **Reply #916 on:** April 14, 2008, 01:17:21 AM »

Quote from: TEPaul on April 13, 2008, 01:53:43 PM

I've been scanning through this thread and there were some minor but civil disagreements on here of certain specific facts and some opinions but the very FIRST evidence I can see on here where this thread began to devolve in a bad and unfortunate direction was this from T MacWood on Nov, 27, 2006;

"I would strongly advise not arguing with TE or Pat on this subject. Based on their level of effort it is apparent neither has an interest in finding the truth."

Maybe he was trying to be funny and maybe he wasn't. He sure didn't use any emoticon. In my experience this is how these things began to devolve with him on numerous threads. His implication seemed to be that no one could research things like he did. And all this seemed to evolve over a disagreement of what people like Robert Lesley really meant when he described #10 as an Alps or whether it really was blind from the approach!

Are these the kinds of things the likes of MacWood and Moriarty from other states who hardly know Merion because one may've been there once but the other has never been there, should be fixating on and taking us to task over for disagreeing with each other or even them?

I don't think so but I do know that is precisely how and why most of these Merion threads devolved downhill with those two contributors.

TEPaul:

I am doing my best to be civil, but this post is absolutely outrageous. Throughout this thread you and another (but mostly you) posted then later deleted literally HUNDREDS of posts containing personal insults, name calling, defamation, and other boorish behavior. A very large number of these posts occurred BEFORE Tom MacWood's comparatively innocuous comments above.

In fact the only reason the thread reads remotely civil is because you guys generated but later removed almost all of the incivility in the thread, and while not entirely successful, I tried not to respond in kind.

Please do not continue to unfairly impugn MacWood or mislead about the history of these topics, or you will pull us back into a morass from which we will not likely escape.

You wanted to put this stuff behind us, so why don't you?

« **Reply #917 on:** April 14, 2008, 01:44:51 AM »

I asked Patrick to take a look at what I considered to be a pretty rough draft of a Merion article I am trying to together for the In My Opinion section, and he agreed to offer his comments and constructive criticism, and to not share it with anyone until I decided to do so.

I asked him to read it is because I was interested in his opinion and knew his comments would improve the product. I asked for his confidence was because I dont think it is ready, and putting it out there early would be a disservice to the site and, frankly, would create far more trouble on these boards than it is worth.

Despite the repeated defamations and accusations there is nothing sinister about it.

« **Reply #918 on:** April 14, 2008, 07:43:19 AM »

David:

Sorry about that.

I'm pretty sure most people on here would rather not have uncivil posts on these threads. Maybe you and Tom MacWood should think about deleting yours too. Perhaps that would make them more pleasant reading in the future and perhaps that's one of the reasons the delete button was put on this website.

It seems you are the only contributor on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com who has tried to suggest that it's uncivil for any or us to remove uncivil posts.

Would it be uncivil of me if I asked you, for about the tenth time, to deal fairly and intelligently with our questions to you about the Wilsons' reports on the creation of Merion East? Would it be uncivil to ask you why you've avoided acknowledging them recently and why you basically overlooked or dismissed them in the past? Would it be uncivil of me to ask you if you've ever read Alan Wilson's report on the creation of Merion in its entirety and if not why not? In our opinion, it's very likely the single most comprehensive and credible source of information on the creation of the original phase of Merion East and West and who did it and how.

« **Reply #919 on:** April 14, 2008, 07:47:09 AM »

Quote from: TEPaul on April 14, 2008, 07:43:19 AM

It seems you are the only contributor on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com who has tried to suggest that it's uncivil for any or us to remove uncivil posts.

I took it that he was suggesting the thread is no longer a complete record of what was said, therefore it can be misleading when read.

Joe

« **Reply #920 on:** April 14, 2008, 07:58:01 AM »

Joe:

Good point, it probably is. Frankly, I'd like to see the posters who make uncivil posts remove them and then we all might get on with the business of discussing the subject of these threads.

« **Reply #921 on:** April 14, 2008, 08:01:11 AM »

Quote from: TEPaul on April 14, 2008, 07:58:01 AM

Joe:

Good point, it probably is. Frankly, I'd like to see the posters who make uncivil posts remove them and then we all might get on with the business of discussing the subject of these threads.

I am the king of deletion! However, with the new system, I haven't figured out how to delete without leaving a blank post. Do you know how to delete?

Ciao

« **Reply #922 on:** April 14, 2008, 09:50:16 AM »

Joe Hancock,

Of course you are correct.
________________________________
TEPaul.

The simple and obvious solution is for posters to think about the civility of their posts before posting.

People who repeatedly behave uncivilly ought to be removed from the site. Leave the offending posts. Remove the posters. This would resolve the issue rather quickly.

« **Reply #923 on:** April 14, 2008, 12:57:40 PM »

Quote from: Sean Arble on April 14, 2008, 08:01:11 AM

Quote from: TEPaul on April 14, 2008, 07:58:01 AM
Joe:

Good point, it probably is. Frankly, I'd like to see the posters who make uncivil posts remove them and then we all might get on with the business of discussing the subject of these threads.

I am the king of deletion! However, with the new system, I haven't figured out how to delete without leaving a blank post. Do you know how to delete?

Ciao

Sean,

Give me a minute, and I'll come up with a not so clever acronym for something along the lines of "I'm a dumbass and typed something I shouldn't have, so I deleted it". That way, when you want to delete a post, you erase your previous typing and type the acronym....

See?....easy....

« **Reply #924 on:** April 14, 2008, 01:19:52 PM »

Quote from: Joe Hancock on April 14, 2008, 12:57:40 PM

Quote from: Sean Arble on April 14, 2008, 08:01:11 AM
Quote from: TEPaul on April 14, 2008, 07:58:01 AM
Joe:

Good point, it probably is. Frankly, I'd like to see the posters who make uncivil posts remove them and then we all might get on with the business of discussing the subject of these threads.

I am the king of deletion! However, with the new system, I haven't figured out how to delete without leaving a blank post. Do you know how to delete?

Ciao

Sean,

Give me a minute, and I'll come up with a not so clever acronym for something along the lines of "I'm a dumbass and typed something I shouldn't have, so I deleted it". That way, when you want to delete a post, you erase your previous typing and type the acronym....

See?....easy....

Nearly a Canuck Joe

I've been called a dumbass before, but it usually involved making a wrong turn at least! I like to delete many of my posts because I treat nearly all of them as conversations - they don't need to remain in perpetuity (huh?) - sort of like this post - to save the world from electronic rubbish. Mark my words, one day it will be an issue - ha.

Ciao

News:

JESII

TEPaul

wsmorrison

Patrick_Mucci

wsmorrison

TEPaul

Mike_Cirba

TEPaul

Mike_Cirba

TEPaul

Patrick_Mucci

Mike_Cirba

Joe Hancock

wsmorrison

Patrick_Mucci

TEPaul

DMoriarty

DMoriarty

TEPaul

Joe Hancock

TEPaul

Sean_A

DMoriarty

Joe Hancock

Sean_A