News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #75 on: March 25, 2004, 01:09:53 PM »
Pat,

Chicken or Egg?  Design Great courses or ability to sell to get great clients?  He was known to be fairly flamboyant, and all great architects are great salesman and promoters.

I'm not sure if you are referring to his career in the 20's or his gig with the PGA when you call him architect of choice, but assume you mean the former, when saying this.  As noted above somewhere, he got the PGA gig through his good friend George Jacobus, and it sounds like a good idea for the pros involved, but also somewhat a charitable gesture towards Tillie, no doubt.

As to compensation, I think I have read (in the Tillie Trilogy) some of his reports, and he specifically recommends local architects or at least builders to carry out the work.  This avoids the conflict of interest in working for free, or using his PGA position to solicit work for himself.  I have not looked that up to confirm, though.  And, I have been wrong before!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #76 on: March 25, 2004, 03:20:59 PM »
Jeff Brauer,

Do you think that Tom Doak had to do much selling after Pacific Dunes made its debut ?

Would you categorize Tom Doak as a great salesman ?

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #77 on: March 25, 2004, 03:30:53 PM »

At the end of the year Tilly would give a report during the PGA annual meeting, basically giving a scorecard -- the number of bunkers removed and the estimated dollar figure. In 1936 he reported he had advised 370 courses and 7427 traps had been removed, at an estimated savings of $164,000/year in trap raking. (I wonder what the raking costs were at Bethpage?) He eliminated 92 traps at one course; 41 at another.


I would simply like to know what bearing, if any, these "savings" had on Tillie's compensation. If his salary was in anyway tied to these quantifiable "savings" then it would raise eyebrows, b/c tillie would have a vested interest in eliminating bunkers.

I started off this thread on Tillie's side, now I'm not so sure.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 04:15:10 PM by SPDB »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #78 on: March 25, 2004, 03:43:28 PM »
SPDB,

How do you reach your conclusion that AWT was paid on a per bunker removal schedule.

Tom MacWood doesn't say that in the part you quoted.
Phil Young also refutes your contention.

Yet, you persist in concluding that he was paid on a per bunker removal, with absolutely no facts to support your contention.    Why smear AWT because you've made an irrational leap to an irresponsible conclusion ?

Ask yourself, why would the PGA pay him on a per bunker removal basis ??

What motivation would the PGA have for the wholesale removal of bunkers through out the country ?

It's an irresponsible, if not an absurd conclusion.

Perhaps you misread and/or misinterpreted Tom MacWood's above post, which you quoted.

Mike_Cirba

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #79 on: March 25, 2004, 03:50:03 PM »
Patrick;

Wouldn't you think that the ongoing "viability" (re: funding) of Tillinghast's PGA work would have to be based on some quantifiable result?  

In this case, it seems that the PGA's purpose was 1) Promotion of their professional membership to clubs, and 2) Helping clubs with "cost savings".  

I think Tillie sensed that his contract was based on the understanding that he had to prove the benefit of his cost-saving measures.  Why else would he fastidiously report such detail items as 7,000 bunkers to his bosses?  

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #80 on: March 25, 2004, 04:02:17 PM »
Mike,
Wouldn't you think that the ongoing "viability" (re: funding) of Tillinghast's PGA work would have to be based on some quantifiable result?

For who ?
What benefit inures to the PGA ?
 

In this case, it seems that the PGA's purpose was 1) Promotion of their professional membership to clubs, and 2) Helping clubs with "cost savings".

Do you really feel that the PGA was a viable force or influence on golf clubs ?

If so, why couldn't the get their local members, the club pro, access to the clubhouses at the clubs they served ?


I think Tillie sensed that his contract was based on the understanding that he had to prove the benefit of his cost-saving measures.  Why else would he fastidiously report such detail items as 7,000 bunkers to his bosses?  

What leads you to sense that, quessing or documentation ?

Are there any minutes that directly connect the number of bunkers he removed at local clubs to his method of pay by the PGA ?

He would report to provide them with an idea on the scope of his travels.  He was on their payroll and most firms like to know about the activities of those on their payroll.

How much do you think he was paid per bunker ?


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #81 on: March 25, 2004, 04:10:57 PM »
Pat,

I don't know Tom that well, nor have I ever sold directly against him that I can recall, but I think he is not as flamboyant as some others, and even a bit quiet at times. So, perhaps, he does let Pacific Dunes speak for him at times!

But, he still has to sell.  Yes, Keiser has given him some repeat business and/or referrals to friends.  Others may had a job or two on a silver platter.  But, I understand that some of the projects he is pursuing are competitive, with other top architects also involved, so he still has to sell his ideas, personality, and approach to many potential new clients.

Most certainly!

I don't disagree with your contention that having designed a great course or two helps the sales process.

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Phil_the_Author

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #82 on: March 25, 2004, 04:12:13 PM »
It appears to me that the singular point that many are missing is the purpose for this service.

The Depression cut the funds that the PGA of America was receiving. Many members stopped paying their dues as well as quit the organization. Remember, the PGA was the pros organization, NOT the clubs. When money was free and flowing the clubs paid the dues as part of the pros compensation. When hard times came, this stopped.

Jacobus had to give his members a "quantifiable value" for the membership dues. This value was measured by the clubs keeping their pros, and remember also many fired their pros as a cost-cutting measure, and by the pros giving something to their club, in this case a free consultation by a recognized world-class architect.

As a result, the one to benefit from this was the PGA! Membership rose, the fledgling tour of paid tournaments were funded, Pros got their jobs back, and Tillinghast didn't receive one extra dime for any of this, beyond what the PGA was paying him.

The monies that the PGA saw from this was not immediate, but a slow and steady increase in the dues that were owed and finally paid as well as more dues received with more pros now actually joining.

Remember too that Tillinghast ONLY went to courses that had a pro who was a member of the PGA of America. There are many examples in the letters he wrote to Jacobus during this time of his refusal to visit courses because the pro was not a member. In each case they were refered to the local head of the PGA chapter they would belong in. Again, the PGA benefited, but no extra money was seen by Tillinghast.

Finally, if this was the fiancial windfall for Tillinghast that some claim, why did he lose his home during this period? Why would he stop traveling and making money when he needed it the most?

The arguments don't hold.

Now if anyone wants to say that the PGA greatly benefited from this I would whole-heartedly agree for the reasons stated above. That, though, is a different kettle of fish.

« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 04:12:42 PM by Philip Young »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #83 on: March 25, 2004, 04:15:17 PM »
Jeff Brauer,

I would imagine that an important factor, if not the critical factor, in the process is the developer, and his needs.

Perhaps he needs to be sold on one or more of the following.

Ideas, concepts, the architecture, or the man.

There has to be chemistry or trigger that acts to connect the developer and the architect.

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #84 on: March 25, 2004, 04:18:30 PM »
Pat -
How do you reach the conclusion that I'm reaching a conclusion?

If you read my post again, you might notice that i'm looking for what criteria Tillie's salary is based on, and if it is somehow tied to the work done, and savings accrued then it would raise eyebrows.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #85 on: March 25, 2004, 04:27:18 PM »
SPDB,
I would simply like to know what bearing, if any, these "savings" had on Tillie's compensation.

Nothing provided to date indicates that the two are linked.

Why would the PGA hire him and direct him to eliminate as many bunkers as he could ?  How would it serve the PGA if every bunker at every golf course was removed ?


If his salary was in anyway tied to these quantifiable "savings" then it would raise eyebrows, b/c tillie would have a vested interest in eliminating bunkers.

Again, there is no record of a tie in.
Your conspiracy theory is inflamatory and derogatory, absent the slightest inkling of supporting documentation


I started off this thread on Tillie's side, now I'm not so sure.

I can understand that, but theory, without motive, and without supporting documentation, would seem to be irresponsibly painting a great architect in a poor light.
And, if this was the case, as Tom MacWood points out, why would he continue to design golf courses with bunkers and also leave his prior creations as is, if he had financial incentive to do just the opposite ?

« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 04:28:04 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #86 on: March 25, 2004, 04:30:21 PM »
Phil -
I think you seem to be missing what I (and perhaps others) am trying to figure out.

I know Tillie didn't get paid by the clubs, that is crystal clear - no one is disputing that. But that doesn't foreclose the analysis. On what criteria was Tillie compensation made? arbitrary? % of "maintenance savings" ... what? It matters not that it was a pittance. No one is disputing that Tillie was justified in wanting to make any money during a period when a large percentage of the population were making no money. However, that doesn't answer the dispositive question. Which one of the the following do you think is most correct:

1. That Tillie thought the America's courses were overbunkered and bunkers should be eliminated irrespective of financial situations. ["Pure Overbunkering Theory"]  

2. Whether Tillie thought that clubs could save on maintenance by cutting down bunkers and brought this idea to the attention of the PGA, who agreed. ["Tillie Practical Bunkering Theory"]

3. Whether the PGA thought courses could save on maintenance, and recruited Tillie to make recommendations to club on this basis ["The Disinterested Employee Theory"]


Which one?

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #87 on: March 25, 2004, 04:35:50 PM »
Pat - Under any interpretation, my post is merely a series of if/then propositions. There is no conclusion drawn within it, and for you to say that there is, is unfair. I'm merely looking for facts which can help fill in those proposition.

When I make a conclusion, you will know because the clauses following "if" and "then" will be transposed, the "if" and "then" will be removed and the clauses will be joined by "because"


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #88 on: March 25, 2004, 04:43:57 PM »
SPDB,

You're asking me to make a forced choice on one of ONLY three possible answers, answers that I have some disagreement with.

Those three aren't the only possibilities, and to confine your thinking to just those three doesn't shed light on the situation.

Could it simply be, that through the local PGA pro, the PGA was trying to make a service available, where a famous architect would consult with a club that had a PGA Pro, for the purposes of assisting that club with cost efficiencies associated with architecture and maintainance ?

And, by doing so, the PGA was selling to clubs, one of the benefits that a club could enjoy from employing a PGA Pro ?
A free consulting service.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #89 on: March 25, 2004, 04:58:03 PM »
Pat !
You're speculating without the slightest factual support!  ;D

Seriously, though, what you subscribe would fall into the Disinterested Employee Theory, viz. It was the PGA's idea.

By the way, you're "free consulting service" sounds a lot like the soft dollar business.

If a club actually decided to keep employing a PGA pro because of the "free consulting service", then its technically not a free service. But for the architectural service, the money they paid the PGA pro would not have been spent. The architectural service part of the bargain, which is covered either explicitly or implicitly by the money they pay their Pro.  

Mike_Cirba

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #90 on: March 25, 2004, 05:11:03 PM »
I'm really happy that I started this thread.  I think there are some wonderful ideas and research being discussed here and I'm hopeful that everyone, particularly Tillinghast's biggest proponents (and I include myself in their midst) is taking this for what it is...an exploration of a dark time in golf course architecture history and what golf architecture might look like again in a shrinking economic environment.

I like to think that if Tillinghast were still alive, he'd be in here debating, as well.  

 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 05:12:03 PM by Mike_Cirba »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #91 on: March 25, 2004, 05:11:14 PM »
SPDB,

There is no doubt that I offered another possible explanation in the same speculative fashion that you postured your three examples.

There is no evidence, not one shred of fact yet revealed that would lead one to conclude that AWT had a direct financial interest in the eradication of bunkers throughout the country.

I don't agree with your last statement either.
Whether it was implied consent, quid pro quo, or a tacit understanding makes no difference.  If hiring a PGA pro provided a "value added" at no additional cost to the club, why wouldn't that be a good marketing incentive.

Remember, it's the club that establishes the amount of money that they will be paying the Pro, not the PGA.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #92 on: March 25, 2004, 05:16:13 PM »
Mike Cirba,

What you are missing is:
It wasn't a dark time for golf course architecture,
It was a very, very dark time for all of America,
and golf course architecture was just one element affected by the bleak and dire financial times.

If guys were jumping out of buildings because of adverse finacial reverses, cutting maintainance costs at clubs would seem rather prudent, especially since membership at most golf clubs was and continues to be a luxury, paid for by disposable dollars deemed luxury dollars, by the guys jumping out of the windows.

Surely, even a lefty can understand that.

T_MacWood

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #93 on: March 25, 2004, 06:17:21 PM »
Phil
I did not know Tillinghast was a professional and member of the PGA. Your information appears to contradict Graffis.

I was under the impression Tilly was an amateur--didn't he compete in a number of National Ams and other amateur events? Although I did know he attended one of the early PGA meetings with other prominent amateurs and sports writers: Ouimet, John Anderson, etc. When did he join the PGA?

Regarding the Duffers Headaches, you characterized them as being 140 yards (or nearer) from the tee. How many such bunkers did Tilly (and Burbeck) build at Bethpage-Black (a course that ironically opened while Tilly was on the PGA tour)...was he less concerned with the duffer and raking costs when he designed Bethapge?  

What are a few examples of bunkers we have today (or had) which have the sole purpose of punishing the duffer?  

As you understand Tilly's definition of DH, wouldn't Cypress Point, PVGC, NGLA, SFGC and St.Andrews have numerous examples of this type of bunker?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 06:19:52 PM by Tom MacWood »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #94 on: March 25, 2004, 07:18:32 PM »
Tom MacWood,

On NGLA, the following holes have duffers bunkers, as defined as 140 yards or closer to the tee.

Hole #'s, 1,,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,12,13,15 and 16

If the definition is slightly increased to 150 yards, the following holes would be included

Hole #'s 11 and 17

And, if we go to 160, the following holes would be included.

Holes # 8, 10 and 14

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #95 on: March 25, 2004, 07:38:32 PM »
Pat -
No one is disputing or ignorant of the fact that the depression placed a large majority or people and private institutions in dire peril. It needs no discussion, no explanation. Nor is anybody disparaging Tillie. We are merely trying to figure out what happened during his employment with the PGA.

My concern, personally, is what criteria his compensation was based on. Pure and simple. I am not making conclusions, as you indicate. As you indicate, I have no direct evidence affirmatively indicating that his compensation was somehow tied to the number of bunkers eradicated. However, eradication of bunkers was viewed as a success in terms of reduced maintenance costs, which was the goal of the PGA program. The logical inference that one can draw from this is that, at least in the eyes of the PGA, the fewer bunkers the better. Stop saying I'm making conclusions when i'm only trying to get answers and provoke discussion about an issue that has at least some relevance in view of the circumstances.

As for you disagreeing with my last statement, that doesn't surprise me. The PGA program was aimed at keeping PGA pros employed. It therefore goes without saying that Pros were losing there jobs. If this program of providing Tillie "free of charge" was successful in keeping Pros employed, as it evidently was, it logically follows that the clubs saw retaining their pros was an investment in their course. You can imagine what was taking place at a number of these clubs, that compelled the PGA to come up with this plan:

Club A decides to let its pro go b/c times are tough, and they need to retain cash for obvious reason. The PGA steps in and asks the club would they reconsider if they offer AWT to them "free" so that they can reduce costs through maintenance improvements? Club A thinks this is a pretty good deal and probably worth the price of keeping their club pro. This is not costless to the club, who, but for the PGAs offer would have saved the salary of their club pro. In real terms, they got a club pro and a consultant very cheaply, i.e. discounted. For a club that was ready to axe its pro, but for the services of Tillie, you cannot say it was free.

T_MacWood

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #96 on: March 25, 2004, 09:09:00 PM »
Jeff
I'm not sure about the house foreclosure...I believe I read the same thing. Tilly was a great person by most accounts and that reaction would seem to support that conclusion. I know he was also involved in charities....he sponsored an annual tournament for one of the diseases.

I know he auctioned off quite a bit of his memorabilia in 1930, perhaps his financial difficulties began after the crash.



I have no idea how Tillinghast was compensated by the PGA. He was on the payroll which probably means he was a salaried employee...but who knows. It is possible Tillinghast was given a bonus based on how much money he saved each club. It certainly was never reported that way...then again I don't believe the PGA (and Tillinghast) would want it known he was being paid based on how many bunkers he removed. Those who say he wasn't incented in that way are guessing...no one knows for sure.

According to Graffis there was considerable politics in the PGA presidential campaigns. Jacobus enjoyed being president and evidently was a sharp politician, but he was also controversial and unpopular with quite a few of the pros (in particular the strong Chicago pros).

The year before hiring Tilly, Jacobus developed another program to help illustrate the value of a PGA professional to the clubs. Dr. LS Dickinson, who started a maintenance school at Amherst, Mass, was hired to give free lectures for greenkeepers and officials from PGA employed clubs. Jacobus also set up programs to improve teaching skills, equipment repair, pro shop management, etc. Tilly was hired (a two-month experiment) right before the 1935 annual meeting and election. Jacobus was re-elected.

It seems the only way to prove the effectiveness of this project was to quantify the results. (There was no way quantify the maintinance lectures the year before) In order to place an overall figure on the 'improvments' they came up with an estimated dollar amount for annual raking (between $20 and $25 per bunker).

The problem with this method, it ignores other cost savings measures and it presumes all bunkers are created equally. The cost of raking one of the massive bunkers at Bethpage is not equal to raking the Devil's Arse. Another problem, this method of quantifying could easily lead to overzealous debunkering in order to project maximum benefit to the clubs, the pros and to the golf world. This over emphasis on the numbers seems to be supported by Tilly's annual scorecard to the PGA membership, and those numbers were then reported in the major newspapers and golf magazines to publicize the impressive results.

Another concern: is a single day enough time to analyze a golf course and come up with a thoughtful plan?  

IMO Tillinghast appears to have developed a hatred for overbunkering and a concern for raking costs sometime between laying out Bethpage and taking the PGA assignment--a matter of a few weeks (and five years deep into the Depression). If he had been complaining about raking costs and over bunkering in the early 30's, I could accept his prudent change in attitued, but I see no evidence in his writings of that attitude change and the Bethpage design doesn't support it either.

I wouldn't call it selling out, but I would call it compromising.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #97 on: March 25, 2004, 09:18:43 PM »
SPDB,
The PGA program was aimed at keeping PGA pros employed.

How do you know that ?

If this program of providing Tillie "free of charge" was successful in keeping Pros employed,

How do you know that ?

... it logically follows that the clubs saw retaining their pros was an investment in their course.

How can you draw that conclusion ?


Club A decides to let its pro go b/c times are tough, and they need to retain cash for obvious reason.

How do you know that these were the circumstances and that this was the club's thinking ?

The PGA steps in

How could the PGA insert themselves into the affairs of any given club, they had neither the authority or the clout.

and asks the club would they reconsider if they offer AWT to them "free" so that they can reduce costs through maintenance improvements?

How do you draw this wild conclusion ?

Club A thinks this is a pretty good deal and probably worth the price of keeping their club pro.

There is no evidence to support your theory of a pre-approved deal

This is not costless to the club, who, but for the PGAs offer would have saved the salary of their club pro.

How do you know that, it's all supposition on your part, an unfounded and wild theory.

In real terms, they got a club pro and a consultant very cheaply, i.e. discounted. For a club that was ready to axe its pro, but for the services of Tillie,

How do you know that those were the FACTS ?

And,  how can you posture that it was systemic ?
That's irresponsible on your part.


you cannot say it was free.

Of course I can, it was free, the club paid no money directly or indirectly to the PGA for AWT's services.

If you have factual evidence to the contrary, please provide it, otherwise cease with your folly.

« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 09:21:42 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

Phil_the_Author

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #98 on: March 25, 2004, 09:32:50 PM »
Tom,

I believe that you have de cided what must be and are sticking with that, rather than going by what Tilly, Jacobus and others stated about all of these for themselves.

1- I did not pick 140 yards as an arbitrary number. Go back and re-read what I wrotte & you will see I was quoting from an early article written bt TILLINGHAST! He referred to many (not all) D.H.'s as being in that range. His feeling was that the only purpose it served was to punish the duffer; hence the name Duffer's Headache!

2- He wrote about poorly placed bunkers as far back as 1901 when he referred to the "pits" at St. Andrews as such.

3- You keep harping on Bethpage. The Black course does not now and never has had "Duffer's Headache" type bunkers.

The first of the new courses, the Blue, had this written about it when it opened for play in 1935, an exhibition match was played on May 9th. In an article describing the match and the course, the New York Times on May 10th contained this, "In constructing it the builders have kept in mind the purpose to which it is dedicated. It is a wide-open course, giving the fellow who is not a sharpshooter plenty of width through the fairways."

In other words, the duffers could enjoy themselves.

In another article, this one on April 19, 1935, in reference to the Black course that would open one year later states, "the Black Course... will be the equal of any championship links in the country."

As you can see, the courses were designed and built for different levels of play. This was purposeful and planned. Your references to the bunkers at Bethpage are incorrectly used.

It is time that you answer the question I posed to you earlier in this thread and have sidestepped answering until now. Please define what Tillinghast meant when he referred to a bunker as being a, "Duffer's Headache."

I did by using Tillinghast's own definition. Was he not telling the truth?

Several other answers for questions that were raised.

Tillinghast sold off many of his antiques and family valuables over the years. I have a copy of an advertisement from 1922 that lists the auction of rare books from the A.W. Tillinghast library at Christies in New York.

His financial dificulties were caused by several things including an unknown illness at the time. When he lost the house in Harrington Park, it was as much a documentation error and no follow-up on his part as it was financial. This is directly from his granddaughter.

As some may know, I am currently at work on a very in-depth biography of Tillinghast. I have been given access to all of the family holdings and memorabilia. I have interviewed in person and telephone all four survivng grandchildren, each one who has memories of him. Ihave interviewed eleven of the great-grandchildren and even one great-great-grandchild. Rick Wolffe of the Tillinghast Association has kindly given me access to all of their records, and I have spent a lot of hours researching through the PGA library & museum and USGA Library and museum.

I have shared a few startling finds with some already & hope to be able to share more soon. The problem I have is one of time. I am working very hard on finishing it so that my publisher, Classics of Golf, can have it in stores by November.

Now, all of that being said, I do NOT believe that I am the be all and end all expert on Tillinghast. I have no problem with those who disagree with any conclusions that I have or will draw and, not that I would expect it, I hope that no one holds back from gicving it to me when they disagree.

I'd like to share an anecdote that many do not know about. In the early 30's, Tilly had a foreman on a crew who was proving to be very inadequate for the job. For a variety of reasons, including some that most will find highly ironic when they learn the whole story, Tilly finally fired him. He chose to put a man that the entire crew frespected in his place. He was Lonny, and Lonny was black. Lonny felt inadequate for the job, but Tilly had faith in him. When Lonny told him that he didn't know some things and that he couldn't read or write, Tiliy said, "Don't worry, I'll Teach you." When Lonny told him that it was almost time for him to travel down to the Carolinas for his winter job, Tilly said, "No Lonny, you will stay and live with me this winter. You and your wife Mary will live in the apartment in the carriage house. I will teach you everything you need to know this winter."

And that is why young Barbara Worden, grand-daughter of Tilly, woke up one night in the winter of 1931. There was a lot of noise and yelling, and lights were flashing into her room. Scared, she got out of her bed and went into the hallway where her mother was standing by the window looking out.

Not realizing her daughter had awakened and walked up and started to stare out the window as well, they both stood transfixed, as in the fields between the house where the Worden's lived, and the main house where Tilly lived, stood a huge cross on fire, burning away into the night.

The Klan burned crosses in protest iover Lonny all winter.

Tilly never replaced Lonny.

 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 09:55:52 PM by Philip Young »

T_MacWood

Re:Did Tillinghast "Sell Out"?
« Reply #99 on: March 25, 2004, 10:47:31 PM »
Phil
The Duffer's Headaches that Tilly condemned were often side bunkers--he wrote about this during his tour. Bethpage-Black had a number of side bunkers (and some carry bunkers--the eleventh) within 140 yards -- #5, #7, #10 and #11. Ten and Eleven are load with these bunkers, large rake-intensive ones. What differentiates these bunkers from the 7000+ other bunkers that were removed?

What are a few examples of DH bunkers we have today (or had yesterday) which have the sole purpose of punishing the duffer?

As you understand Tilly's definition of DH, wouldn't Cypress Point, PVGC, NGLA, SFGC and St.Andrews have numerous examples of this type of bunker?

When did Tilly join the PGA?