[TEPaul]

"I see. Now your theory includes Crump clearing and building the first seven holes and then changing his mind just before Colt arrived. Good one."

Tom MacWood, honest to God, what in the world is the matter with you? It seems to take you forever to figure any of this out. Others sure do understand it.

First of all, and once again, you've apparently failed to read correctly what I've said many times on here about that potential 7th hole that Tillinghast described. Philip Young has explained to you as well  regarding what Tillinghast said about that potential 7th hole iteration and how you were wrong to characterize it as constructed and ready for seeding.

Here's what Tillinghast said about that potential 7th hole iteration that was less developed than the previous holes but apparently you can't seem to figure that out or what he  meant. Here's what Tillinghast said in April 1913 Golf Illustrated about it:

"The next hole (7th) is less developed than any of these I mentioned, but enough has been cleared to show something of its requirements. A long well placed drive must carry an enormous dip through which flows a stream of clear water. The second is a high shot with a mashie if the drive has been  well hit, but if it has not the longer shot with the mid-iron will prove exceedingly bohersome."

Now, Tom MacWood, I've already told you a number of times that if one goes directly behind the present 6th green and looks straight away east, one will see that enormous dip through which clear water flows and that landform Tillinghast described as 'the less developed 7th hole'. Crump did some clearing in that area to look at that potential hole and then decided not to use that landform and area but to turn around and go in the opposite direction with what is now the 7th hole.

The par 5 sixth hole that Tillinghast described in April 13 came from a tee next to Crump's short par 3 5th with it's green off to the left in the hillside next to the intersection of the road to the clubhouse with a tee shot up to the ridge where Owen's house was eventually built and where the 5th green is now and from there two shots to the green that is now the 6th green of the present par 4 6th hole.

Are you beginning to get a glimmer of any of this yet? This is why never seeing a golf course becomes problematic---eg you just don't seem to understand much about the place.

"By the way the 9th on the stick (current 7th) does not play over a deep depression and stream."

Of course it doesn't, and I've told you that about five times. It plays in just about the exact opposite direction!!  

"The fact that you are unable to identify a long unreachable par-5 6th (and we know Crump appreciated very long par-5s) followed by a par-4 7th over a deep depression/stream is the reason why your theory has unraveled."

My theory is not unraveling at all and I identified that long par 5 6th that Tillinghast described years ago, and I just described above, AGAIN. I just can't help it if you can't understand any of this but the fact that you can't in no way means my theory is unraveling, it only means you don't know much about Pine Valley, its land and what happened there.

"The pieces of your puzzle do not fit."

They certainly do fit, it's just that you don't know Pine Valley well enough to understand what Tillinghast described and I am accurately reiterating.  

[T_MacWood]

"I see. Now your theory includes Crump clearing and building the first seven holes and then changing his mind just before Colt arrived. Good one."

Tom MacWood, honest to God, what in the world is the matter with you? It seems to take you forever to figure any of this out. Others sure do understand it.

First of all, and once again, you've apparently failed to read correctly what I've said many times on here about that potential 7th hole that Tillinghast described. Philip Young has explained to you as well  regarding what Tillinghast said about that potential 7th hole iteration and how you were wrong to characterize it as constructed and ready for seeding.

Here's what Tillinghast said about that potential 7th hole iteration that was less developed than the previous holes but apparently you can't seem to figure that out or what he  meant. Here's what Tillinghast said in April 1913 Golf Illustrated about it:

"The next hole (7th) is less developed than any of these I mentioned, but enough has been cleared to show something of its requirements. A long well placed drive must carry an enormous dip through which flows a stream of clear water. The second is a high shot with a mashie if the drive has been  well hit, but if it has not the longer shot with the mid-iron will prove exceedingly bohersome."

Now, Tom MacWood, I've already told you a number of times that if one goes directly behind the present 6th green and looks straight away east, one will see that enormous dip through which clear water flows and that landform Tillinghast described as 'the less developed 7th hole'.

I think you've got your directions mixed up. If you look due east from behind the 6th green you will be looking back toward the 6th fairway. Is your theory now that this is when the course became reversable a la Travis?

Crump did some clearing in that area to look at that potential hole and then decided not to use that landform and area but to turn around and go in the opposite direction with what is now the 7th hole.

I think you are talking about looking due west or northwest (not east) and right off the property. Two days ago I thought you might be going this direction. That Crump had wandered off his property. God knows how he would've routed the course back toward his land. I'm sure you have theory for that too.

The par 5 sixth hole that Tillinghast described in April 13 came from a tee next to Crump's short par 3 5th with it's green off to the left in the hillside next to the intersection of the road to the clubhouse with a tee shot up to the ridge where Owen's house was eventually built and where the 5th green is now and from there two shots to the green that is now the 6th green of the present par 4 6th hole.

The present 6th is less than 400 yards, add another 100 yards for good measure and you still don't have a long unreachable par-5. Sorry back to the drawing board on the 6th too.

Are you beginning to get a glimmer of any of this yet? This is why never seeing a golf course becomes problematic---eg you just don't seem to understand much about the place.

"By the way the 9th on the stick (current 7th) does not play over a deep depression and stream."

Of course it doesn't, and I've told you that about five times. It plays in just about the exact opposite direction!!  

"The fact that you are unable to identify a long unreachable par-5 6th (and we know Crump appreciated very long par-5s) followed by a par-4 7th over a deep depression/stream is the reason why your theory has unraveled."

My theory is not unraveling at all and I identified that long par 5 6th that Tillinghast described years ago, and I just described above, AGAIN. I just can't help it if you can't understand any of this but the fact that you can't in no way means my theory is unraveling, it only means you don't know much about Pine Valley, its land and what happened there.

Your theory is constantly changing....we've just learned today 1) that Crump changed his mind (even though he was constructing these holes), thats why the 6th and 7th aren't on the stick map and 2) Crump was laying out the course on someone else's land. No wonder Colt was brought in.

The pieces of your puzzle do not fit, and your most recent explanations make no sense.

[TEPaul]

"I think you've got your directions mixed up. If you look due east from behind the 6th green you will be looking back toward the 6th fairway. Is your theory now that this is when the course became reversable a la Travis?"

Tom MacWood:

Well, if it's not due east, look at it this way---if you stand immediately in front of the present 6th green and look straight ahead you will be looking in the direction where that 7th hole iteration Tillinghast described would have gone (that is the direction in which about 100 yards behind the sixth green that enormous dip and that stream of clear water is). If you turn almost in the opposite direction and look just off to the right of the 6th fairway (looking back) you will see the direction Crump went with the 7th hole on the first stick routing and in actuality).

[TEPaul]

"The present 6th is less than 400 yards, add another 100 yards for good measure and you still don't have a long unreachable par-5. Sorry back to the drawing board on the 6th too."

Tom MacWood:

From the tee for the par 5 6th hole iteration that Tillinghast described one would've had to hit a drive way up hill and probably between what originally was Owen's house and the present 5th green and over the present 6th tee up to the ridgeline that is just to the right of the road through the course (obviously that road wasn't there then). Perhaps you don't realize where Crump's 5th green was that Tillinghast was describing. That's not at all surprsing for someone who has never seen Pine Valley. To hit a drive in that direction from that original 6th tee iteration is one helluva lot longer than 100 yards!!  

Furthermore the green positon on that par 5 6th hole iteration that Tillie described could've been up to 50-60 yards farther out than the par 4 6th green Crump built which interestingly is where Crump wanted to move the green to on the par 4 6th hole that he did build.  

The present 6th green is probably 20 yards farther out than the one Crump built.

You may understand Pine Valley's creation some day, Tom MacWood, but it will take you a while at the rate you're going.  

[TEPaul]

"Your theory is constantly changing....we've just learned today 1) that Crump changed his mind (even though he was constructing these holes), thats why the 6th and 7th aren't on the stick map and 2) Crump was laying out the course on someone else's land. No wonder Colt was brought in."

We've just learned today....?

Who is "we" Tom MacFud???

Plenty of people understand all this. Just because you don't understand it has very little to do with any of these facts.

My theory is constantly changing??

All this information from me is on Pine Valley threads in the archives of this website.

Are you ever going to figure out what Tillinghast said about that 7th hole iteration over the enormous dip and the stream? ONE MORE TIME, SKEBO, the f....ing thing WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED as you keep mindlessly saying. Tillinghast merely said Crump cleared enough to look at it (Before turning around and going the other way).

Crump may've been off the land but even I don't know where the property line was back then on that corner of the property (it very well may not have been the corner line on what we see on those topos. After-all he originally did buy 186 acres of Ireland's land). Not to mention the fact that Crump obviously could've bought whatever of Sumner Ireland's substantial tract of land he wanted to for the golf course at that early point or at any other time, all proven by the fact that that is exactly what Crump did in 1917---eg he bought another 400 acres of Ireland's land that now includes where that initial iteration of #7 was and also includes far beyond that all the way to Pine Valley's "Short Course" and other things like PV houses such as president Gordon Brewer's current house.

I've decided I'm going to keep toying with this remarkably obtuse line of questioning of yours just so others on here can eventually see what an idiot you really are, not to even mention how obtuse you are about Pine Valley and its creation.    

The irony is, if you'd ever been to Pine Valley I doubt even you would be posing these ridiculous questions and making the preposterous statements. But then again, your stupidity never ceases to amaze.  

[T_MacWood]

"I think you've got your directions mixed up. If you look due east from behind the 6th green you will be looking back toward the 6th fairway. Is your theory now that this is when the course became reversable a la Travis?"

Tom MacWood:

Well, if it's not due east, look at it this way---if you stand immediately in front of the present 6th green and look straight ahead you will be looking in the direction where that 7th hole iteration Tillinghast described would have gone (that is the direction in which about 100 yards behind the sixth green that enormous dip and that stream of clear water is). If you turn almost in the opposite direction and look just off to the right of the 6th fairway (looking back) you will see the direction Crump went with the 7th hole on the first stick routing and in actuality).

TE
So I was right the other day when I suspected your theory might have Crump leaving his property. Crump was not an idiot. Come on.

[T_MacWood]

"The present 6th is less than 400 yards, add another 100 yards for good measure and you still don't have a long unreachable par-5. Sorry back to the drawing board on the 6th too."

Tom MacWood:

From the tee for the par 5 6th hole iteration that Tillinghast described one would've had to hit a drive way up hill and probably between what originally was Owen's house and the present 5th green and over the present 6th tee up to the ridgeline that is just to the right of the road through the course (obviously that road wasn't there then). Perhaps you don't realize where Crump's 5th green was that Tillinghast was describing. That's not at all surprsing for someone who has never seen Pine Valley. To hit a drive in that direction from that original 6th tee iteration is one helluva lot longer than 100 yards!!  

Furthermore the green positon on that par 5 6th hole iteration that Tillie described could've been up to 50-60 yards farther out than the par 4 6th green Crump built which interestingly is where Crump wanted to move the green to on the par 4 6th hole that he did build.  

The present 6th green is probably 20 yards farther out than the one Crump built.

You may understand Pine Valley's creation some day, Tom MacWood, but it will take you a while at the rate you're going.  

I have to give it to you, you've got a vivid imagination. There is no long unreachable par-5 6th on the stick routing. There is no long par-5 unreachable 8th on the stick routing.

Crump was constructing the 6th that Tilly described. Why isn't it on the routing map? Change of mind?

[T_MacWood]

"Your theory is constantly changing....we've just learned today 1) that Crump changed his mind (even though he was constructing these holes), thats why the 6th and 7th aren't on the stick map and 2) Crump was laying out the course on someone else's land. No wonder Colt was brought in."

Are you ever going to figure out what Tillinghast said about that 7th hole iteration over the enormous dip and the stream? ONE MORE TIME, SKEBO, the f....ing thing WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED as you keep mindlessly saying. Tillinghast merely said Crump cleared enough to look at it (Before turning around and going the other way).

He was in the early stage with 7th, he was clearing the route. Is it your contention Crump was clearing land outside his property? The long unreachable 6th was beging constructed. Why isn't it on the stick routing?

Crump may've been off the land but even I don't know where the property line was back then on that corner of the property (it very well may not have been the corner line on what we see on those topos. After-all he originally did buy 186 acres of Ireland's land). Not to mention the fact that Crump obviously could've bought whatever of Sumner Ireland's substantial tract of land he wanted to for the golf course at that early point or at any other time, all proven by the fact that that is exactly what Crump did in 1917---eg he bought another 400 acres of Ireland's land that now includes where that initial iteration of #7 was and also includes far beyond that all the way to Pine Valley's "Short Course" and other things like PV houses such as president Gordon Brewer's current house.

Regarding the property lines, do you think the surveyor may have been mistaken when he produced the topo map?

I've decided I'm going to keep toying with this remarkably obtuse line of questioning of yours just so others on here can eventually see what an idiot you really are, not to even mention how obtuse you are about Pine Valley and its creation.    

I think that would be a wise move. Unfortunately the damge has already been done. Wow.

The irony is, if you'd ever been to Pine Valley I doubt even you would be posing these ridiculous questions and making the preposterous statements. But then again, your stupidity never ceases to amaze.  

[TEPaul]

"TE
So I was right the other day when I suspected your theory might have Crump leaving his property. Crump was not idiot. Come on."

Tom MacWood:

What makes you think Crump was leaving the property? I don't even know where the property lines were back then of his 186 acres. Do you?

Do you understand how possible it may've been to buy any additonal land he may've been willing to buy from Ireland? Do you even know how much of that land Ireland owned and where it was? Did you even know that he eventually did buy that land from Ireland where that iteration of #7 IS?  

Are you beginning to finally figure out where that 7th hole iteration land was and is that Tillinghast described in Golf Illustrated in April 1913?  

And if not, where do you suppose that land was and is that Tillinghast was describing in that 7th hole iteration that was never to be built?  

[T_MacWood]

"TE
So I was right the other day when I suspected your theory might have Crump leaving his property. Crump was not idiot. Come on."

Tom MacWood:

What makes you think Crump was leaving the property? I don't even know where the property lines were back then of his 186 acres. Do you?

What makes me think he was leaving the property? His topo map 'Property of GAC'. Crump was not an idiot. Give me a break.

Do you understand how possible it may've been to buy any additonal land he may've been willing to buy from Ireland? Do you even know how much of that land Ireland owned and where it was? Did you even know that he eventually did buy that land from Ireland where that iteration of #7 IS?  

Your theory expands further: Crump bought 186 acres. Commisioned a surveyor to map his property for the purpose of routing a golf course. He began routing his course and after six holes he was off his property and boxed off from returning.

Come on. Crump was not an ignorant man.

Are you beginning to finally figure out where that 7th hole iteration land was and is that Tillinghast described in Golf Illustrated in April 1913?  

No. I have more respect for Crump than you obviously do.

And if not, where do you suppose that land was and is that Tillinghast was describing in that 7th hole iteration that was never to be built?  

[TEPaul]

"I have to give it to you, you've got a vivid imagination. There is no long unreachable par-5 6th on the stick routing. There is no long par-5 unreachable 8th on the stick routing.

Crump was constructing the 6th that Tilly described. Why isn't it on the routing map? Change of mind?"

Yes, that's right MacBefuddled, how many times do I need to tell you that Crump changed his mind and went in the opposite direction with what is now #7?? As we've mentioned a number of times now Crump may not have even had that topo he put the routing map on when he and Tillinghast were looking at that that 6th iteration, and that potential iteration for #7 that Tillinghast described as partially developed (partially cleared). Is it possible that you can't understand that? What if they were looking at it in Februrary or March before the surveyor produced that topo survey map? Is it possible you can't understand that Crump didn't put those iterations on the topo survey map if he didn't have it?

What if Crump had already cleared that area that he was originally looking at as the par 5 6th hole that were the landforms that eventually were going to become the par 3 5th hole and the par 4 6th hole?

I think we do know that Crump had cleared that area that Tillinghast described as the par 5 6th iteration and was eventually to become his 5th hole (as recommended by Colt) and the par 4 that is now the 6th hole.  

MacFud, I don't like you as you know and I don't give a good God-damn how much you put your foot in your mouth and embarrass yourself but honest to God, I really can't believe even you are putting yourself through what may even eventually occur to you is some real embarrassment. Let's call it research embarrassment, shall we?  

The self-proclaimed "expert researcher historian" goes down in flames and totally embarrasses himself in front of 1500 GOLFCLUBATLASERS, and it takes him about month to even figure out that he has.

I love this!  

[T_MacWood]

"I have to give it to you, you've got a vivid imagination. There is no long unreachable par-5 6th on the stick routing. There is no long par-5 unreachable 8th on the stick routing.

Crump was constructing the 6th that Tilly described. Why isn't it on the routing map? Change of mind?"

Yes, that's right MacBefuddled, how many times do I need to tell you that Crump changed his mind and went in the opposite direction with what is now #7??

No you are confused once again. The 6th hole Tilly described (not the 7th)...the long unreachable par-5...why isn't it on the routing map. Change of mind on that hole too?

As we've mentioned a number of times now Crump may not have even had that topo he put the routing map on when he and Tillinghast were looking at that that 6th iteration, and that potential iteration for #7 that Tillinghast described as partially developed (partially cleared). Is it possible that you can't understand that? What if they were looking at it in Februrary or March before the surveyor produced that topo survey map? Is it possible you can't understand that Crump didn't put those iterations on the topo survey map if he didn't have it?

The theory expands further. Crump had no clue where his property lines were. He began routing (at times in the company of an experienced architect), he began clearing and he began contructing his course while not knowing where his land began and ended. You would have us believe Crump was a fool.

What if Crump had already cleared that area that he was originally looking at as the par 5 6th hole that were the landforms that eventually were going to become the par 3 5th hole and the par 4 6th hole?

What if Martians came down and began shot testing on land that would become hell's half acre? Its all very interesting speculation.

I think we do know that Crump had cleared that area that Tillinghast described as the par 5 6th iteration and was eventually to become his 5th hole (as recommended by Colt) and the par 4 that is now the 6th hole.  

Thats nice. Is this based upon something Crump or Tilly said or did it come to you in a dream?

MacFud, I don't like you as you know and I don't give a good God-damn how much you put your foot in your mouth and embarrass yourself but honest to God, I really can't believe even you are putting yourself through what may even eventually occur to you is some real embarrassment. Let's call it research embarrassment, shall we?  

The self-proclaimed "expert researcher historian" goes down in flames and totally embarrasses himself in front of 1500 GOLFCLUBATLASERS, and it takes him about month to even figure out that he has.

I love this!  

[T_MacWood]

Let us review:

* Crump began routing, clearing and constructing his golf course without knowing where his property began and ended

* Crump's 7th hole was routed outside his property, a hole which would have effectively boxed him off completely from his property

* Crump began clearing land outside his property

* Crump commissioned a surveyor to produce a map that did not accurately reflect what was in fact his property

* Crump changed his mind on the routing of his 6th and 7th because the 7th was off the property...we still don't know what was wrong with the underconstruction 6th

* Crump was in the process of constructing the 6th hole when the topo map arrived and for whatever reason chose not to transfer it to the map..changed his mind I guess

* Crump was an idiot

[TEPaul]

"No you are confused once again. The 6th hole Tilly describe...the long unreachable par-5...why isn't it on the routing map."

Tom;

If Crump didn't yet have the topo survey map when he was showing that hole to Tilinghast on the ground out there at Pine Valley how could he have put it on the topo survey map? If he'd changed his mind about that hole (and the undeveloped #7 that Tillie described that was never built) when he GOT the map perhaps in March or April 1913 why would he put it on the map? He put the hole iterations on the map he was considering when he got the map. Have you yet noticed WHERE Crump's holes #6 and #7 ACTUALLY ARE on that topo survey map?? And do you even understand WHERE THEY WERE on the ground at Pine Valley???

DOES THAT EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY THAT PAR 5 6th HOLE ITERATION MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE MAP? And if not WHY NOT?

[T_MacWood]

I know you don't know the answer because its all speculation but I'll ask it anyway. Why did he change his mind on the 6th?

[TEPaul]

I know you don't know the answer because its all speculation but I'll ask it anyway. Why did he change his mind on the 6th?"

Well, MacFud, I never met Crump because he died 26 years before I was born so I never actually got the chance to ask him what was in his mind about the holes he showed Tillie and Tillie described in Golf Illustrated in April 1913 but looking at his first topo routing map he obviously decided to go over the ridge with his #6 to a green about 30 yards to the right of present #10 green. From there he decided to come back with his #7 with a hole that went from next to present #11 fairway to a green about where John Ott's house is (at the left of the fairway of present #9). From there he went to a tee that is present #6 tee and from there to a green that is about at present #6 green. That was his 8th hole. Present #7 was his 9th hole. ALL THAT IS ON HIS FIRST TOPO ROUTING MAP! Are you even aware of that???

And if so why the hell are you having a problem understanding any and all of this?

[T_MacWood]

I've asked you a number of questions regarding inconsistancies with your theory and for us to accept your tortured responses we would have to believe Crump was an idiot. I frankly find it insulting to his memory.

[TEPaul]

“I've asked you a number of questions regarding inconsistancies with your theory and for us to accept your tortured responses we would have to believe Crump was an idiot. I frankly find it insulting to his memory.”

Tom MacWood:

Yes, you’ve been asking me a number of questions about Pine Valley for years and you’ve concluded my answers are inconsistent theories. Five years ago you proclaimed A.W. Tillinghast’s reporting about Pine Valley was inconsistent too.  

Let’s take a look at your remarkable bulleted review of what you’ve now concluded;

“Let us review:

* Crump began routing, clearing and constructing his golf course without knowing where his property began and ended

* Crump's 7th hole was routed outside his property, a hole which would have effectively boxed him off completely from his property

* Crump began clearing land outside his property

* Crump commissioned a surveyor to produce a map that did not accurately reflect what was in fact his property

* Crump changed his mind on the routing of his 6th and 7th because the 7th was off the property...we still don't know what was wrong with the underconstruction 6th

* Crump was in the process of constructing the 6th hole when the topo map arrived and for whatever reason chose not to transfer it to the map..changed his mind I guess

* Crump was an idiot”

In your first five bulleted conclusions you’ve apparently decided Crump was off the property. Do you know where the property’s boundaries were back then, and if so, how do you know that exactly?  

If Crump was off the property that must have meant Tillinghast was describing a potential phantom 7th hole that was partially cleared but that didn’t exist and writing about it in Golf Illustrated in April 1913, that Morris Parrish probably built his house at Pine Valley on land off the property or on land that didn’t exist and the access into Pine Valley was off the property or on land that didn’t exist. Oh, and of course foreman Govan and his family must have been living at Pine Valley on land off the property or on land that didn’t exist.

I guess that means in your opinion everyone who had anything to do with Pine Valley before Harry Colt arrived to straighten everyone out must have been a bunch of idiots too, right Tom MacWood?

Tom MacWood has described himself on here as “an expert researcher and golf architecture historian”, particularly of a number of courses he’s never been to or seen.  What do you think about that now GOLFCLUBTLASERS?  

But let’s see if he’s even capable of answering a straightforward question which heretofore he’s never been much good at doing.

Tom MacWood, if you know Pine Valley so well where do you suppose the 6th and 7th holes that Tillinghast described in the April 1913 issue of Golf Illustrated were?    

[wsmorrison]

Hey, Tom.  Was Morris Parrish related to Maxfield Parrish?  They are of the same generation.

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

Was Maxfield Parrish another one of those early idiots at Pine Valley who built a house at Pine Valley somewhere off the property?  

If so I guess we need MacFud to explain to us that Maxfield needed Harry Colt to get down there to straighten him out too, huh?

Colt was acutely aware of everything around him but apparently Crump didn't exactly appreciate him moving Crump's 2nd green (Crump's response was a stentorian "NO GOOD") and placing the tee for #3 in the middle of what was to become one of the coolest greens in the world.  

[wsmorrison]

That would be Maxfield (given name Frederick) Parrish, the illustrator and painter.

They could have also been related to Samuel Parrish who must have lost his mind and moved from Philadelphia to New York and was one of the early influencial members of Shinnecock Hills.  He had a gallery or museum in Southampton as I recall but was a lawyer by trade.

[TEPaul]

Wayno;


Morris Longstreth Parrish was the son of Samuel Longstreth Parrish, book and art collector, as you noted. Morris L. Parrish, was the world's premier collector of Victorian Novelists, particularly Anthony Trollope. His world famous collection was eventually (1944) bequethed to Princeton University where the panelled library from Dormy House (Parrish's house) at Pine Valley was recreated.

Maxfield Parrish was the only son of Frederick Parrish of 19th-early 20th century etching and art fame.

All of them were apparently heavy into the arts and art collecting but I don't know if they were related (they certainly weren't brothers) and if they were what their relationship to each other was. But apparently being from prominent Philadelphia and/or Quaker families perhaps they were related.

Maxfield studied at Drexel Institute and had quite a bit to do with the pre-Raphelites, so I'm quite sure Tom MacWoodenhead will figure out some way of implying Maxfield Parrish must've had a powerful influence on the Golden Age of Golf Architecture since he too must have been a proponent of the Arts and Crafts Movement. MacFudd will undoubtedly imply this must make Pine Valley G.C. in reality a true "Arts and Crafts Golf" golf course since Maxfield must have been somehow related to Pine Valley's Morris Parrish or perhaps met him once at a cocktail party somewhere around here where perhaps Horace Hutchinson or Willie Park of the publisher of Country Life Magazine might have been somewhere in the vicinity too implying that has to mean they all must have been asshole buddies and propoents of William Morris and his globe spaning Arts and Crafts "philosophy" that was never actually given a name for the simple reason it didn't need one because it was imbued in all artists of any ilk, including the best Golden Age golf course architects (Ah sorry I should more appropriately call them "Arts and Crafts" golf architects) around the world.  

Despite Morris Longstreth Parrish's art significance and the significance of his Victorian novelist collection housed at the Parrish House (Dormy House) at Pine Valley, MacFudd still probably assumes Parrish was also a Philadelphia idiot (like Tillinghast and Crump et al) for building his house at Pine Valley off the property by mistake.  

[T_MacWood]

“Let us review:

* Crump began routing, clearing and constructing his golf course without knowing where his property began and ended

* Crump's 7th hole was routed outside his property, a hole which would have effectively boxed him off completely from his property

* Crump began clearing land outside his property

* Crump commissioned a surveyor to produce a map that did not accurately reflect what was in fact his property

* Crump changed his mind on the routing of his 6th and 7th because the 7th was off the property...we still don't know what was wrong with the underconstruction 6th

* Crump was in the process of constructing the 6th hole when the topo map arrived and for whatever reason chose not to transfer it to the map..changed his mind I guess

* Crump was an idiot”

In your first five bulleted conclusions you’ve apparently decided Crump was off the property. Do you know where the property’s boundaries were back then, and if so, how do you know that exactly?  

In March 1913? Yes. Take a look at the survey map entitled 'Property of Geo A Crump'. Crump purchased 184 acres in late 1912...the survey map is dated March 1913...on April 1, 1913 (Perrin letter) they still had 184 acres. Are you going to tell us that Crump was so confused that he had the surveyor create a map that didn't accurately reflect what he owned? Come on. Crump was a bright man.

If Crump was off the property that must have meant Tillinghast was describing a potential phantom 7th hole that was partially cleared but that didn’t exist and writing about it in Golf Illustrated in April 1913, that Morris Parrish probably built his house at Pine Valley on land off the property or on land that didn’t exist and the access into Pine Valley was off the property or on land that didn’t exist. Oh, and of course foreman Govan and his family must have been living at Pine Valley on land off the property or on land that didn’t exist.

Potential phantom 7th hole? Just because you haven't been able to figure out where the 6th and 7th holes were on the property doesn't mean that they were phantom holes.

Morris Parrish built his house in 1916....long after Crump routed his 7 holes and long after Colt did his work. According to the club history PV purchased parcels of land and here & there before a very large purchase in 1917 which brought the total acreage to over 500. Today the club leases a total of 32 acres to people who have homes on the property. Of the 32 acres how much do you reckon the Parrish house makes up? This is a red herring.

I guess that means in your opinion everyone who had anything to do with Pine Valley before Harry Colt arrived to straighten everyone out must have been a bunch of idiots too, right Tom MacWood?

As you continue to develop (and 'develop' is generous) your theory....that is what you would have us believe.

Tom MacWood has described himself on here as “an expert researcher and golf architecture historian”, particularly of a number of courses he’s never been to or seen.  What do you think about that now GOLFCLUBTLASERS?  

But let’s see if he’s even capable of answering a straightforward question which heretofore he’s never been much good at doing.

Tom MacWood, if you know Pine Valley so well where do you suppose the 6th and 7th holes that Tillinghast described in the April 1913 issue of Golf Illustrated were?  

I don't know where they were.

Now let me ask you a question. The stick map shows two version of the 3rd hole. According to Tilly that hole was well under construction, describing the green complex in detail. In fact Tilly said several of the greens were ready for preperation. Why the two iterations for the 3rd on the stick map?  

I must say it is disapointing that you resort to name calling and bringing up all sorts of extraneious issues that have nothing to do with the topic. It seems this often happens when you are frustrated. I think it would be in the best interest of everone if you would limit this kind of behavior.

[TEPaul]

"Potential phantom 7th hole? Just because you haven't been able to figure out where the 6th and 7th holes were on the property doesn't mean that they were phantom holes."

Tom MacWood:

I know exactly where the par 5 6th and undeveloped 7th Tillinghast described was. I said the 7th must be a phantom hole in your mind because you know Tillinghast described it (not the constructed hole but its 'undeveloped' requirements over an enormous dip and a stream of clear water) but you obviously don't know where it was and you obviously can't even imagine where it was.

"I don't know where they were."

Yes that has been pretty clear all along. You have even apparently concluded that #7 that Tillie described was off the property or that I said it was off the property. I've said Crump was clearly able to buy any land he wanted out there from that very large tract of Sumner Ireland and that is exactly what he did through those years there until he died. So why are you assuming that 7th hole had to be off the property or I'm implying it had to be off the property? Perhaps you shouldn't automatically conclude the side of a golf course routing map is the corner of Crump's property at any particular time.

"Now let me ask you a question. The stick map shows two version of the 3rd hole. According to Tilly that hole was well under construction, describing the green complex in detail. In fact Tilly said several of the greens were ready for preperation. Why the two iterations for the 3rd on the stick map?"

Obviously because Crump drew two versions of the 3rd hole on that map. Do you see anything wrong with that? We certainly do know he began to build one of those two versions that are on the map and that's what Tillinghast was describing. And we know he began building them before H.S. Colt arrived.

Let me ask you again, where do you think the par 5 6th and the undeveloped 7th Tillinghast described in the April 1913 Golf Illustrated article were? They had to be somewhere, don't you think or do you disagree with that too?    

"I must say it is disapointing that you resort to name calling and bringing up all sorts of extraneious issues that have nothing to do with the topic. It seems this often happens when you are frustrated."

I'm not in the slightest bit frustrated. Why would I be frustrated? I'm having a lot of fun here watching your confusion which is probably understandable for someone who has never seen Pine Valley. But you must be frustrated because you know what Tillinghast was describing and you know how he described #6 and #7 and you admit you can't figure out where they were. That must be pretty frustrating.  

[TEPaul]

Tom MacFudd, since you apparently have no ability to even imagine these kinds of things here are a couple of cute stories about intial routing.

About the third day Bill Coore was here with me looking at Ardrossan Farms he got out there real early one morning and when I got there I couldn't find him. So I called him and asked him where he was and he said he wasn't sure but that there was a road way below him. So I figured that out after a while and found him sitting on a great green site but I told him that the both of us had been told we shouldn't be looking over in that area. He just said it was a great site for a golf hole and  we should ask for it.

Another time while he was walking around French Creek in the initial routing stage Roger Hansen called him up and Bill said he found a great landform for a hole. Roger asked him what it looked like but when Bill described it Roger didn't recognize it even though he'd owned the land for years. When Bill described it in more detail Roger realized Bill had walked right off the property and right onto a New Jersey State Police practice shooting range next to French Creek. So, Roger told Bill to run for his life before somebody shot him by a mistake.

But since you've never been on a site obviously in the initial routing stage you probably think Bill Coore is an idiot too.

Down at Newark Del on a site I'm consulting on for the Love Co I got all tangled up in the woods and trying to climb over brambles and bushes and old barbed wire fence lines and walked onto the next property for a while not realizing it.

Again, no way you could understand any of those stories because you have no experience with it and it shows.  

But I'm pretty sure Crump knew exactly where he was with that undeveloped 7th hole Tillie described. The only problem is you don't know where he was, and you probably never will realize it.    

Oh, I forgot the best one of all. Dick Youngscap bought X amount of acres initially at Sand Hills and Bill routed about 130 potential holes. Then Ben shows up one time and found two great landforms for holes. Only problem was Dick Youngscap didn't own the land Ben walked on to. But they were great landforms for holes and so Dick Youngscap bought them from the guy who owned all the land out there he was buying from for Sand Hills and that area where Ben was off the property is now part of holes #14 and #15.

I guess you think Ben Crenshaw's an idiot too, huh?  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()