News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Please note, each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us and we will be in contact.


Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #75 on: June 12, 2003, 05:19:48 PM »
Does anyonehave any proof whether Ross was at Aromimink or not?   Nobody appears to have a clue.

Sometime, I'll copy the Tillinghast reports of his Aronimink and post it here-he definitely visited it!

Why does all this have to get so bleeding personal (using "you" and snide name calling)?  It's happened many times before, but now days any thread of any length, turns into slagging match; it spoils the site IMO-no wonder we never see Ran post anymore.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2003, 06:07:51 PM »
Pat said;

"I maintain that Ross wasn't there.
Do you know for a fact, as of this moment in time, that he was ?  If so, present your proof.

You knowingly entered this discussion without knowing anything about the bunkers recently built at Merion and Aronimink.  Don't get testy because you don't like the answer to questions asked, and don't tell me that I made something up.  It has been repeated several times on this site, especially a thread about Aronimink, that Ross wasn't on site, and returned upon completion of the course, something he was prone and known to do."

Pat:

You maintain that Ross was never on site at Aronimink? Why do you maintain that? Is it because to date nobody on Golfclubatlas has given you proof that he was on site? That's a pretty neat trick! I thought you were the guy who liked to deal in fact. Why wouldn't you just reserve an opinion on whether or not Ross was on site until someone who really might know looks into it first--like maybe the club, or Ron Prichard or the library at Pinehurst?

Joe Logan, the Philly Inquirer golf reporter told me last week as he researched a series of articles on Aronimink for the Senior PGA at Aronimink that Ross was known to spend up to a month in Philadephia on his way north to Rhode Island or Boston from Pinehurst in the summer. Ross for many years had an office in Wynnwood probably no more than six miles from present Aronimink. J.B. McGovern, the apparent project manager at Aronimink was the office manager of Ross's Wynnwood office. It'd be a very odd thing indeed if Ross had never been on site at Aronimink in Newtown Square, Pa.

And one would also wonder how Ross had done such fine "field" drawings (Ron Prichard said they were the best "field" drawings by Ross he'd ever seen) of the design of Aronimink if he'd never been on site.

The reason you may've thought Ross was never there may have come from something I once said on here about that remark Ross made about Aronimink--ie, "I intended Aronimink to be my masterpiece but until today I did not realize how well I built".

All, I ever said about that--somewhat in jest--is a statement like that might be considered a publicity agent's nightmare as it could be construed to mean that Ross had not been around much. But on the other hand many other people could simply take it to mean he didn't really realize how good he thought it was until the completion of construction.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2003, 06:10:35 PM »
Paul Turner said;

"Does anyone have any proof whether Ross was at Aromimink or not?   Nobody appears to have a clue."

Paul:

I'll ask Tom Elliott, the Green committeeman who had the most to do with Ron Prichard and the Aronimink restoration about that---he's sure to know.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2003, 06:10:37 PM »
Pat Mucci:

I'm not aware of any "quantitative" study of how many people like and don't like the new bunkers at Merion. Nor am I aware of any new rule at Golfclubatlas that requires discussion group participants to conduct such a study before offering any point of view.

There are plenty of natural obstacles to people offering golf architecture criticism. I don't think we we need to add quantitative studies as an additional requirement for saying anything critical, do you?

Mike Cirba:

The entire golf industry, including the private club world, is so insular that it is awfully difficult for people to speak critically about anything. But, I think golf architecture benefits in the long run by people willing to speak out occasionally and sign their name to it. Hopefully, people will understand that you only mean the best for the game.



« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Tim Weiman

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2003, 06:29:24 PM »
Tom Paul:

I went back and read what I wrote about Merion in The Confidential Guide today and was glad to find that every single word I said about it is still true.  I didn't talk about the plants in the bunkers at all, strangely enough, though I liked them immensely and thought they gave the course a character all its own.

I suspect that's why they are gone now.  For twenty years, the Merion membership had basically heard nothing about the course except why it wasn't long enough to hold the Open anymore.  I think they lost faith in the fact that they were a BETTER course because of their differences, and sought out someone who would put the course more in line with modern notions of greatness, as Tom Fazio is certainly qualified to do.

(Likewise, I was at National last week, and I wonder if they are succumbing to the idea that they aren't as good as the Open course next door because they too are different ... an ugly thought.)

Tom, to answer your question, if I had been asked to take the plants out of the bunkers I would have tried to argue against it.  That may be why they didn't talk to me about it; they already had their minds made up.  I could not have really talked to them anyway because I would not have wanted to be seen as trying to take the job away from the previous architects, as much as I loved the golf course.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #80 on: June 12, 2003, 08:01:32 PM »
Tom MacWood,

Do you know for a fact that "Restoration" was the mission statement, and the ONLY mission statement at Merion ?

And, how can you make an analysis of MacDonald & Co's work if you don't know what the design specs were ?
Oh, I forgot, you can, you're self qualified.

TEPaul,

The reference to Ross not being on site is during construction, not surveying or drawing up plans.
But, you knew that, right ?

Tim Weiman,

You were the one who made the statement about "Many" not liking the bunkers at Merion.  Many implies quantification.

Tom Doak indicated that MacDonald & Co did good work for him.  Based on critical acclaim, it would appear that they did good work for Ron Prichard at Aronimink.  I believe that they produced what they were directed to build at Merion.  Hence, I believe that they shouldn't be blamed for the bunker work and bunkers that some are disatisfied with at Merion.

Perhaps some are barking up the wrong tree.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #81 on: June 12, 2003, 08:10:16 PM »
I came to www.golfclubatlas.com for the first time, about 18 months ago, after reading a Joe Logan piece about Merion's bunkers -- a piece that mentioned a group of golf-architecture nuts who were arguing about it online.

I thought I should check that out. Did. Stayed.

None of my business, and not that you asked, but I'll tell you anyway:

This spat is neither improving with age, nor showing any sign of dying gracefully.

Can't you all just agree to disagree?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #82 on: June 12, 2003, 08:21:39 PM »
Patrick;

If your point is that some in the club got exactly what they wanted with the new bunkers, then I'd probably agree.  However, I'm not sure they understood the ramifications.  If you know what I'm talking about, then enough said.  If not, then I'm not going into it here.

Do I think that MacDonald and Co. could have built bunkers that most of us would have appreciated, given the complexity and variety of the original bunkers there?   If they had the ability, they certainly couldn't do it in the 7-8 months it took to excavate and rebuild the 100+ bunkers on the property.  

There's a reason that good things take time.  I was fortunate to see the work that was being done before them, and I can guarantee that if they had been allowed to complete that work, you wouldn't have heard a negative peep about it from this group.  

Is that bias?  No, it's simply discernment.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

DMoriarty

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #83 on: June 12, 2003, 10:40:50 PM »

Quote
DMoriarty,

I addressed my comments to several named people and many others through "et. al.".  If you took the royal you personally that's your problem.

One only has to read the posts on Merion to see the overwhelming number of critical comments directed toward the architect and contractor.  If people are going to make allegations, they should support or substantiate them when asked.
. . .

The question regarding sequential bunker construction was meant to emphasize a point.  Obviously the question/point went far over your head.

I maintain that Ross wasn't there.
Do you know for a fact, as of this moment in time, that he was ?  If so, present your proof.

You knowingly entered this discussion without knowing anything about the bunkers recently built at Merion and Aronimink.  Don't get testy because you don't like the answer to questions asked, and don't tell me that I made something up.  It has been repeated several times on this site, especially a thread about Aronimink, that Ross wasn't on site, and returned upon completion of the course, something he was prone and known to do.
Patrick,

Refusing to admit your obvious mistakes doesnt mean that you havent made them.  It does make you look quite silly and immature, though.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »

ForkaB

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #84 on: June 13, 2003, 02:36:22 AM »
Tom D

Thank you very much for your comments/observations on Merion (and NGLA).  A refreshing discussion of GCA issues rather than ad hominem attacks/counter attacks/attacks/counter attacks etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nauseum..........
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #85 on: June 13, 2003, 05:11:50 AM »
Dan Kelly (tm);

Did not know you arrived on this website as a result of the Joe Logan article about Golfclubatlas and the Merion restoration project. It seems as if you've been here from the beginning. Anyway, I'm glad you're here and I can't imagine what we would do without our resident lexicographer.

Rich:

'Ad hominem' is a very good term to use for what goes on so often on this site particularly this ongoing Merion subject.

As I've said many times, or tried to, it's a shame the Merion restoration subject and all its many threads on this website took on the cast that it did so long ago. Before that happened the subject and the situation had so much potential for some really good and healthy communication and then due to adversialness and personal swipes from this site all that was lost long ago. It's not that Merion and those who are responsible for it aren't interested in what's said on here---they just won't ever communicate on here and why would anyone wonder about that?

The Internet medium is a fascinating one for ultra swift and comprehensive communication but unfortunately it seem to occasionally completely lack the required "superego" or necessary social consciousness that it generally takes to communicate with people and do it effectively.

And the constant quibbling over bias and double standard on here is just continuing to ruin subject after subject and thread after thread!

Tom Doak:

As Rich said your post #87 is a breath of fresh air on the subject of Merion and it's evolution in the last 20 years or so culminating in their restoration project.

What you mention in that post is more than a breath of fresh air, though. It touches upon not just a minor shift in direction such as cleaning up vegetation in their bunkering. It's far more of a sea-change than that!

And it's certainly not just Merion--it's so many others, probably NGLA and even Pine Valley, Seminole, possibly even Shinnecock to a degree too. My God, even one of the oldest and most long lasting courses of the truly old style--Maidstone--may be considering the new mindset!

What is that slow sea-change and new mind-set? Just as you imply it's the fear of daring to be DIFFERENT! Daring to remain true to those things (sometimes little things) that brought some golf courses to the dance in the first place!!

I don't know how long it's been since you were last at Merion. But it wasn't so many years ago that some of the bunkering at Merion was a virtual jungle--not all but a few. And they were just fascinating in their makeup and variety! A few of them such as the 1-2 on the fairway right on #10 and very much the one just right of #14 were places you didn't want to go not just because you could have a good deal of trouble exticating your golf ball but you also had a pretty good chance of ripping your clothes and probably scratching yourself up somewhat!

And to think that Merion and the USGA actually conducted the 1981 US Open (their last one) that way!! (Remember the photo of David Graham (winner) trying to contort himself into the vegetation (a virtual jungle of plant life and scrub bushes) on that bunker right of #14 green and extricate his ball)?

Why do course like a Merion, NGLA, Pine Valley go this route of cleaning their courses up to the extent of removing much of what was so different about them? I'm sure most know the reasons. It's the new mindset that's basically sweeping the world of golf!

However, one shouldn't generalize about these things too much I suppose. I love the fact that Merion removed the trees that sat in the bunkering on #11 and I love that they removed the trees on the right of the quarry on #16. What I don't love is a fixation in golf that its architecture should formulaically make every golf ball automatically bounce or release off a bunker face into the expectation of a semi-ideal lie or that it's a golfer's birthright that he should receive identical treatment in various places (as Ron Prichard mentioned in a recent interview).

Why did this happen at Merion? Frankly I remember the beginnings of it in some of the best clubs in this area. It happened maybe fifteen years ago when PV had some real conditioning problems and the super-Super, Dick Bator came to town and put them in a condition the likes of which they'd never seen before and only dreamt of. Bator worked on the areas of fairways and greens primarily, though, and did not over-sanitize the rougher areas of PV--including the massive amounts of sand areas.

Then he was off back to Rochester for a time until hired by Merion to do the same thing he'd done for PV. And he did a great job as he always does. But my recollection is the areas of bunkering and such remained as it always had been for a time until finally that too was cleaned up and made to function somewhat more formulaically--and recently PV's was too--and probably NGLA's and Shinnecock's too!

You said;

"I think they lost faith in the fact that they were a BETTER course because of their differences, and sought out someone who would put the course more in line with modern notions of greatness,"

That's such a cogent statement on your part, TomD! I hope you mean it--I know you do--don't back away from it. But this kind of realization is getting harder to sell today--it's flying more in the face of the new mindset in golf of standardized formulaics--and ironically bunkering, that true architectural vestige and tool of an architect's strategic expression is the most prevalent target today! Everywhere you turn today with the proposal to dare to remain different (or what got the course there in the first place) you here someone say;

"That was back then, who cares about that anymore, this is the way golf and all its courses should be today!"



« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #86 on: June 13, 2003, 05:13:22 AM »
Mike Cirba,

So now you agree that if MacDonald & Co built the bunkers to the specifications that they were given, then they did their job properly, and no criticism should be directed toward them.

One of the impediments to restoring the 12th hole at GCGC is  Membership inconvenience.
Taking two or three years to make the bunkers just the way you like them is totally unrealistic and never going to happen.

Tom MacWood,

You say that there are films of Ross allegedly flying over Aronomink.  How would anyone know where he was flying ?

Would viewing a site from 5,000 feet qualify as on site supervision ?

Did he drop notes, like bombs to the construction workers below, depending on the winds to deliver them to the right person ?

Would this mean that if Fazio was flying to or from Philadelphia and the glide path took him over Merion that this too would qualify as on site supervision ?

Have you ever seen the new bunkers at Aronimink and Merion?

DMoriarty,

In keeping with the theme of this thread, do you know anything about the new bunkers at Aronimink and Merion ?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #87 on: June 13, 2003, 05:33:17 AM »
My recommendation would be that those who have never seen or played Aronimink or Merion should do one of two things;

1. Stop commenting on Aronimink and Merion, or better yet;
2. Stop all comments to Patrick Mucci!!!     ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »

HamiltonBHearst

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #88 on: June 13, 2003, 09:53:50 AM »


Mr. Muccia asks relevent and insightful questions that deserve an answer.  Why should he answer stupid questions from you serial deceivers, it is beneath him.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #89 on: June 13, 2003, 10:19:56 AM »
Ok...we've now hit a new low here.  :-/

Hamilton B Hearst, who has contributed so greatly to this site over the years, now steps forward and calls those of us debating this issue with Mr. Mucci "serial deceivers".  

I'd guess that includes, me, Tom Paul, Tom MacWood, Tim Weiman, Dave Moriarty (hope I haven't left any of the evil doers out).  

I'm outta this thread.  If anything was to be learned here it came in fits and starts, and in between all of the personal nonsense.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dave_Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #90 on: June 13, 2003, 11:40:00 AM »

Quote
Pat:

Just curious: What information do you have to suggest that Ross wasn't at Aronomink?  I personally have no documentation to suggest that he was or wasn't, but the quote "I intended to make this course my masterpiece, but not until today did I realize I built better than I knew" has always made me think that Aronomink might have been among the few that actually received some attention.

As I say, just curious...

DW

Daniel:
Ross did spend time at Aronimink of the project but was not there day to day.  James McGovern his assistant oversaw the day to day construction of the golf course.
There are photos of Ross on the property and there is a film showing him on the property.
How much time he spent there I don't know.  But he was not overseeing the day to day as McGovern was.
Best
Dave
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dave_Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #91 on: June 13, 2003, 11:48:22 AM »

Quote
Does anyonehave any proof whether Ross was at Aromimink or not?   Nobody appears to have a clue.

Sometime, I'll copy the Tillinghast reports of his Aronimink and post it here-he definitely visited it!

Why does all this have to get so bleeding personal (using "you" and snide name calling)?  It's happened many times before, but now days any thread of any length, turns into slagging match; it spoils the site IMO-no wonder we never see Ran post anymore.

Paul:

Donald Ross was definitely at Aronimink during the construction but not on a day to day basis.  There are photos of him on site during the construction and there is the movie which many people say was at the official opening.

James McGovern, his assistant, actually oversaw the day-to-day construction.
How often Ross visited from Boston I don't know but he definitely spent time on the site.
Cheers,
Dave

To the Treehouse:
Aronimink is spelled A-R-O-N-I-M-I-N-K NOT Aron-O-mink. ;)
Dave
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #92 on: June 13, 2003, 04:25:30 PM »
Dave

Thanks.  Would you be interested in the Tillie articles, or are they already well documented in the club history...?  

So it appears, that the evidence points towards Ross being on site at Aronimink.  I wonder if we'll get the minor miracle of a conceded point from Patrick?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #93 on: June 13, 2003, 05:08:31 PM »
P_Turner,

The early rap on Fazio was that he wasn't there to supervise MacDonald & Co's work at Merion.

My analogy was that neither was Ross there to supervise at Aronimink and MANY other courses.

So why should Ross get a pass from the treehouse and Fazio take a hit ?

The question is as valid today as it was at its inception.

It's a matter of form versus substance.

I almost always opt for substance, while others prefer form.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Danny

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #94 on: June 13, 2003, 05:13:14 PM »
Had the privilege of playing Gulph Mills today and it is absolutely fantastic. The greens were true, but a little slow; when they get up to speed the course will be an absolute treat. It is visually spectacular, classic Donald Ross. Why does it not get rated at one of the top PA courses? It clearly is so much better than others on the list.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #95 on: June 13, 2003, 05:48:18 PM »
I suppose it was too much to hope for.

Patrick

Nevermind the analogy.

You wrote, "I maintain that Ross wasn't there".  Do you now concede that you're probably wrong with this assertion?  

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #96 on: June 13, 2003, 07:34:53 PM »
Patrick;

We don't know if Donald Ross was onsite much at Aronimink.  Neither do you!  There is evidently a film of him there, but nobody's sure if he was there once, twice, or fifty times.  Neither can we ask him...he's dead!

If Tom Fazio makes one or two site visits to a new course he's building and instead leaves the onsite supervision to Jan Beljan or Tom Marzolf, well, that's his perogative.  I understand that one of my favorite of his courses, World Woods Pine Barrens, was mostly the work of Michael Strantz, who was his associate at that time and that turned out fabulously.  I'd also love to know who did most of the work at Galloway National.

However, this wasn't Pecan Hill, or The Lodge of Beautific Gorgeousity at Desert Valley, or even Rich Guy's Dream at Unlimited Budget Country Club.  

This was Merion, one of the top 10 courses in the world, and possibly the most historic course in this country!!

I think it deserved better than a second-level associate in charge.  I don't mean any disrespect to this associate and I understand he's a heckuva fellow.  I'm just saying that a project of this importance and visibility should have had a lot of hands on care and oversight from the top of the organization.  

I'm starting to think that if some famous architect comes to your course and starts talking about pro bono work, you should most often expect to get what you didn't pay for.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #97 on: June 13, 2003, 08:07:48 PM »
Mike Cirba,

I'm not the only one to say that "free" advice is often the most expensive advice you can get.

Many, if not most contracts have a specific number of visits that are required by the architect.

Does anyone know exactly how many times Fazio was on site?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #98 on: June 13, 2003, 08:14:44 PM »
Is my Q being ignored?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?
« Reply #99 on: June 13, 2003, 08:18:59 PM »
P_Turner,

Does someone posting that Ross was there 80 years ago during construction make it a fact ?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back