OSU Scarlet restoration

[T_MacWood]

"No there isn't.  
There's a rough sketch of a hole labeled 4A
Find and produce the formal plan that you maintain the existance of.  If you can't, then you can't claim one exists."

I'm arguing with a moron.

13. The sky is blue.
That's not true. The sky is not blue it is chartruese. You are intellectually dishonest.

14. They were playing golf as early as 1928 at the new Aronimink.
Disingenous! You don't know that. Are there photos of golfers on the course in 1928? Are there written accounts? If you don't know the answer simply say so. If there are photos, what is the exact date and time. If there are written records, they are likely wrong. You call yourself a historical researcher ?

15. Florida is relatively flat.
You are a HORSES ASS! Florida is not flat, I've been to Florida more than just about every man alive. I know Florida. You've never been to Florida.  Florida is down right mountainous. Your credibilty is dropping like rock rolling down a mountain in Florida.

[TEPaul]

"TE
Two corrections, the plan you refer to as an artistic rendering is called a cross-section analyses in 'Discovering Donald Ross'. It would have been one part of a three part set of renderings created by Irving Johnson--the other two, a large scale map of the entire course and two-demesnional overhead views of each hole and each green, with the notes. Its unfortunate these formalized plans are gone...no doubt they (the full set) were used to construct the golf course as built.
The other correction, the rough sketches do not always match the formalized plans--Holston Hills is a good example."

Tom:

It is unfortunate what you call the 'formalized plans' for Aronimink were gone when the decision was being made on what bunkers to do in the recent restoraton but that was the reality of it.


I didn't say sketches and formalized plans always matched. The point is sometimes perhaps they did and sometimes perhaps they didn't as in the case of Holeton Hills. The primary point is Aronimink did not have them to determine if they did or didn't.

I'm not certain why that plan you included of 4A is part of this discussion of the bunker decisoin of the recent project at Aronimink as it could not have helped in the decision of what to do there.

"Cross section analyses" are interesting but what is the point of that on this bunker decision? As you can see from your posts on page 6 and 7 of this thread it lead you to assume that the sketch of 4A you posted might be another iteration of the present 4th hole.

You mentioned the topography was the same but that the green was in a slighly different place. In fact the land that the "cross section analyses" of 4A shows is not the same land as the present #4. Given that 4A was the fourth hole of the third nine and given that the third nine was on land that is now the practice range, swimming pool and tennis complex that cross section of 4A shows topography that is nowhere near present #4.

[BuckeyeinBuffalo]

I really hate to see the old course changed too much - especially no. 8.  I have fond memories of playing there when I was much younger (in the 70's), and three members of the OSU girl's (women's) team asked if they could join us for a few holes.  I was not having a great round, but when the girls arrived, I was darned sure that I was going to have my "A" game on and not duff it in the water.  I hit one of my best shots ever on that hole.

Sometimes change is warranted.  However, I don't understand why they would want to change a good challenging par 3 like scarlet #8.

Old Dale
I now have the Penn State course (blue) as my home course.
Currently they are changing this course too!

[wsmorrison]

Under many scenarios, it is possible that the nine that was not built at Aronimink was in fact the A nine and the nines that were built were the B and C.  I think drawing a parallel to the 3rd, or C nine at Huntingdon Valley is a stretch.  The C nine was not maintained for a number of reasons, the least of which is that it was the "third nine."  I don't know one way or another, but there's more information needed and anything else is a guess that is likely influenced by preconceived notions.

Where did you find the copy of the 4-A drawing and is it the only one of the A nine that you've seen?  As Tom said, the land occupied by the current 4th hole doesn't match the drawing, especially at the green end.  The landing area on the current 4th is a bit hidden by the crest of a ridge, but the green end doesn't rise at all like the 4-A drawing.

The 4-A drawing you posted is 72 yards longer than the current 4th hole; it would have been even longer than the original 4th.  What would be the impact for the rest of the nine's routing?  The par 3 5th would have to be different and so would the remaining four holes.

[TEPaul]

Tom:

I'm not too sure I see what your points are in this bunker discussion with the drawing of 4A.

I'm pretty sure the club has the plan of the third nine that was not built. I did ask Rick Holanda if he had something on it or knew where it would have been. He said he did. I can probably find out next week if its holes were designated as "A" or something else or I can try to match that drawing to what the plan shows in that area of the range, pool and tennis courts for the 4th hole.

Flynn started to draw app 27 holes at Shinnecock. It might've been 27 or a search for the best 18 hole routing and holes and land there, some of which was on land Lucien Ting and the club hadn't bought yet. Those three nines were designated by color codes.

[wsmorrison]

Why do you conclude that two of the nine design plans predate the design plan of the third?  The third nine was not built, but that doesn't mean it wasn't designed at the same time the other holes.

Flynn designed 36 holes for the Country Club of Virginia.  During construction, holes from both 18s were given temporary hole designations as the course was intended to be played as it was being built in stages.  In the end, only 18-holes were built as a composite of holes from both courses.

Huntingdon Valley was seemingly started as an 18-hole course and part way through they decided to build an additional 9 holes.  The original 18 were labeled 1-18 and the holes on the last nine that was planned were referred to as holes 1-A through 9-A.  It wasn't till sometime after the drawings were submitted that they were referred to as the A, B and C nines.

This is just playful speculation, but since Ross was apparently pissed off/embarrased that he didn't get some choice commissions in the Philadelphia area, particularly Philadelphia Country Club and Huntingdon Valley, maybe he followed Flynn's lead at HVCC in approaching Aronimink's set of holes.  

I think this is a wild guess, but the information is out there to figure out what the set of holes like 4-A at Aronimink are all about.  Are there other drawings from the so-called "A" set from Aronimink?

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

Does that prove that he had no idea what was actually completed there?  Maybe he was surprised when he went back years later.

I was talking to an Old Guard member at Aronimink the other day and he was present when Ross returned and made his famous remark about building better than he knew.  He told me that he heard Ross say under his breath "Where the f--k are the other nine holes?  That Flynn was right; McGovern is a knucklehead! The bloody fool forgot to finish the last nine holes!  And what's with all the multiple bunker sets?"  

Too bad my tape recorder wasn't working  

[wsmorrison]

"I don't subscribe to the theory Ross was a confused old man who could not keep track of his own major projects."

I find it interesting, Tom, that you stretch my point and characterize Ross as a confused old man.  I didn't imply this at all.  He was in overdrive as far as work is concerned and either he or an associate did not refer to the course as built but rather as planned.  That MIGHT but also might NOT mean something.  It is worth considering.  An oversight?  Maybe.  It could well be due to a lack of understanding as to what was built as you referenced a second example at Sedgefield.

I know there was a Great Depression.  In fact I might have to put one in that thick skull of yours    

Aronimink opened a year before the Depression, the bubble was still expanding.  For some as yet unknown reason the club never did build the third nine.  Certainly any thought of having a third nine was tossed once the Depression was underway.  The Depression clearly caused a halt to further construction at CC VA.  

It would be interesting to determine what exactly was going on at Aronimink and the 27-hole dynamics.  Right now, there isn't enough info to make a determination.  I'm sure you'll come up with something, Tom.  You usually do.

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

It is pure speculation on my part, a gut feeling if you will, but I think Ross was so darn busy that few of any courses really registered with the guy over time outside courses he spent time at like those he lived on or near.  I think it a reasonable assumption that 20 years after the fact he didn't have a strong recollection of the place.  

That is not to condemn him for anything other than having an average memory.  That's a lot of courses in between visits.  

I do think it curious that he included at least 2 courses in his CV that were not completed as planned but recorded as planned.  Either his record keeping was a wee bit spotty or his understanding of what took place.  My uniformed vote is for the second choice.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Desperate men do desperate things.

And now that you're trapped like a rat, you attempt to divert the focus from your colossal BLUNDER.

Your claim that Seminole is FLAT.

It shows how flawed your research is.
It shows how willing you are to cling to something you've read, as the gospel, in spite of how incorrect the statement is.
And, it reveals that you're unwilling to accept irrefutable facts when they dispute and refute your position.[/color]

It shows, to the world that you want to impress, that you can't admit when you're WRONG, despite overwhelming evidence and facts that prove that you're WRONG.[/b][/color]

13. The sky is blue.
That's not true. The sky is not blue it is chartruese. You are intellectually dishonest.

Red sky at night, sailor's delight.
Red sky at dawn, sailor be warned.

That may come as news to you because you're usually sleeping in the Ivory Tower at night and at dawn, but,
The sky can be other than blue, or do you want to dispute that at the same time that you claim Seminole is FLAT ?[/color]

15. Florida is relatively flat.

Not at Seminole and not at Jupiter Hills Tommy boy.

I asked you to look at the topos that show the dramatic changes in elevations at Seminole and you continue to fail to acknowledge that you don't know what you're talking aobut.

Why can't you admit that you screwed up ?
That you accepted an alleged quote as fact, when it wasn't.[/COLOR]
 
You are a HORSES ASS! Florida is not flat,
Correct, you are a horses ass.
Seminole is not FLAT as you claimed.
 
You're also a fraud, an intellectually dishonest one at that.
You've lost the issue about Seminole being FLAT and you can't admit that you were DEAD WRONG, and that the quote you cited was flawed, so you try to shift the focus to the State of Florida, which has nothing to do with the site specific topic we were discussing, SEMINOLE.
That's being intellectually dishonest, and you know it, so do I, and so does everybody else.[/color]

I've been to Florida more than just about every man alive. I know Florida. You've never been to Florida.  Florida is down right mountainous. Your credibilty is dropping like rock rolling down a mountain in Florida. [/b]

You're a fraud Tommy boy.
You won't acknowledge the topo map of Seminole and the dramatic changes in elevation ?  You put all of your faith and credibility in an erroneous statement and never bothered to RESEARCH the facts.  And, what's even more amazing is that you continue to cling to that position, the wild notion that Seminole is FLAT.

The quote you cited is incorrect.
Seminole is not FLAT.
And, the fact that you continue to defend the quote as being an accurate depiction of the land, in the face of topos showing just the opposite, as well as accounts from others stating that Seminole isn't FLAT, shows that you can't admit when you've screwed up.  That you're research is flawed, and your credibility compromised.

That you put all of your faith and credibility in a FICTIONAL ACCOUNT OF THE SITE, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary indicates that you can't draw intelligent conclusions and ADMIT WHEN YOU'RE DEAD WRONG and that  your research is flawed.

Desperate men do desperate things.

You're efforts to divert the focus from your obvious and enormous BLUNDER won't work, you've been had.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Where did you find the copy of the 4-A drawing and is it the only one of the A nine that you've seen?  

Wayne,

I hope you've noticed that Tom MacWood refuses to answer your question.

And, he doesn't acknowledge the existance or non-existance of additional hole drawings.

This is another example of intellectual dishonesty on his part.[/color]

As Tom said, the land occupied by the current 4th hole doesn't match the drawing, especially at the green end.  The landing area on the current 4th is a bit hidden by the crest of a ridge, but the green end doesn't rise at all like the 4-A drawing.

The 4-A drawing you posted is 72 yards longer than the current 4th hole; it would have been even longer than the original 4th.  What would be the impact for the rest of the nine's routing?  The par 3 5th would have to be different and so would the remaining four holes.

[TEPaul]

“Wayne
In 1930 Ross was listing Aronimink as 27 holes...at least two years after the 18 holes were built.”

“I don't subscribe to the theory Ross was a confused old man who could not keep track of his own major projects. He also listed Sedgefield as 36 holes...the second 18 was never built there either. There was something called the Great Depression that affected some of these projects....it was in all the papers.”

Tom:

That’s funny. The great depression was in the papers?? You bet it was. Who mentioned any theory of Ross as a confused old man, other than you?? But as far as Ross keeping track of his major projects---if Ross or his company listed Aronimink as 27 holes, nine of which were never built and Sedgefield as 36, 18 of which were never built----that doesn’t exactly sound like particularly good “on the job” oversight on Ross’s part to me. Does it sound like good over-sight to you??  

With an architect that wasn’t on top of his projects like that I wonder if it’s possible that someone like a foreman may’ve slipped a different bunker design in on him that he didn’t become aware of for perhaps 20 years!  

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

The jury is out on Aronimink's 4A? What do you mean by that?

[TEPaul]

"TE
The jury is out in regards to the 'A' nine being the first nine or third nine."

Tom:

What difference does that make?  For that matter maybe it was the second nine. What happened to your idea that 4A was another iteration of the present 4th hole and that the cross section of the elevations of the hole showed that?

[wsmorrison]

Pat,

Yes, I have noticed it on more than one occasion.

Tom MacWood,

Do you have additional drawings from the A-holes?  No pun intended    This would help us to establish the meaning of the hole designation.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

False in one, false in many.

Your die hard allegiance to a highly inaccurate statement, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is indicative of faulty research and a failure to verify the FACTS on your part.

That you can't admit that you're wrong indicates that you won't accept factual documentation that proves your position to be incorrect, and it undermines what little credibility you had left.

Your insistance that Seminole is FLAT, based on an alleged quote by DJR leads one to view anything you cite with enlightened suspicion.

You can make light of your enormous blunder all you want, you tried to promote and perptetuate a fraud and can't admit that you made a colossal mistake.

That's intellectually dishonest and undermines your credibility

But, I"m sure that you already knew that..

[TEPaul]

This thread which started out as one on OSU morphed into another one about Arononimink and its bunker project like so many others. As a thread on Aronimink's bunker project like many of the others this one is beginning to wander all over the place into things like third nines and the meaning of drawings and whatnot.

Ron Prichard and the club seem to have followed these threads to some extent and even from what's been uncovered on here recently as far as how the bunkers were originally constructed they all say they would make the same decision in how to do their bunker project even if they had the information back then that they know now about their bunkers. The point is, as the point has always been, the only thing they can be completely sure of is that Ross's bunker drawings are Ross's and that's all they can be sure of as to what Ross intended for the bunkers of Aroninimk. The additional confirmation is the bunker project is considered a success vs those multi-set bunkers. There only seem to be one or two or so who've complained about them and none of those complainants seem to be those who play Aronimink and in at least one case one whose never even been there.

So in the broad scheme of things the decision and what they did in the bunker project would have to be considered a real success. This is a discussion group and things are inherently different on here because of that but in the real world the bunkers of Aronimink need to prove the project's success or failure in the real world of play. It's pretty clear they've done that.

[HamiltonBHearst]

Hey Macwood, have you even been to Seminole?  I suppose any drawing looks flat sitting on your flat desk in Ohio.  Please admit your error on this thread, in the spirit of intellectual honesty and in order to be a gentleman.

Geez, I haven't seen such disregard for the facts since Dugger showed the fake sand dunes pictures and claimed they represented the land surrounding Sand Pines.

Now it's beginnning to make sense is Macwood really Dugger?

[TEPaul]

Certainly this website and its participants does not have to rely on a comment by Donald Ross as to whether or not Seminole is a flat site. All one has to do is look at a topographical map of Seminole or just go down there and look at the site itself.

The midsection of the golf course is lower and pretty flat but the holes along the eastern and western boundary of the golf course are certainly not flat in relation to the midsection of the course. The elevation change from some of the holes along the western boundary to the lower middle of the course are probably 30-40 feet or more. While that's not unique to the east coast of Florida it certainly isn't common.

Donald Ross was a great architect but perhaps prone to hyperbole from time to time----eg 30-40 feet in elevation change on the holes of a golf course does not exactly constitute a flat site. Maybe what he meant to say is the holes in the midsection of the course are pretty flat but he certainly couldn't have missed the fact that the entire site of Seiminole certainly isn't. The other thing we definitely know is Donald Ross did not make the eastern and western ridgelines at Seiminole.  

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

Are you saying you think Seminole is a flat site? Where did you say that? Are you denying there's probably about 20-40 feet of elevation change from the greens of #2,3,4,5,6,11 and the tees on #4,5,6,7 and 12 down to the lower elevation in the midsection of the course?

[TEPaul]

There certainly is a good deal of "level" land inside the eastern and western ridgelines at Seminole's site but for anyone, including Donald Ross, to say that Seminole's entire site is flat is definitely not correct at all. But did Ross's remark actually say the entire site of Seminole is flat? Doesn't look like that to me. Did Tom MacWood say Seminole's entire site is flat? This has nothing at all to do with bashing Donald Ross. This is just a question of fact.

[TEPaul]

"My concern is with the trend of homogenizing Ross's bunkers....they are nearly all built in prototypical style (even when not historically accurate)."

Tom MacW:

I understand your concern. However, the Aronimink bunker issue is not one of prototypicality when Prichard and the club had bunker plans drawn by Ross himself and they used them in their recent bunker project. If they did not have his bunker plans for Aronimink then I could probably understand your complaint about Aronimink's bunker project---but again, Ross's plans for Aronimink are clear and specific. The question of why they were not used at Aronimink existed back then and the question still exists. That question will continue to exist unless and until some documentary evidence as to why they were changed is found.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

It's doubtful Ross ever made that comment.

One only has to look at his profile drawings and the specific hole by hole drawings at Seminole to see the elevation changes acknowledged by the hole by hole, graphed designs.

In addition, the site has great elevation changes, especially for Florida.

You insist on clinging to a questionable quote, and the FACT that Seminoles site is far from FLAT.

The fact that you won't recognize that the property is NOT FLAT, as evidenced by Ross's own hole by hole designs, photos and topos shows the failing of your research.

You never bothered to verify the facts, choosing instead to cling to a questionable, although highly erroneous quote.

IT's like denying that 2 plus 2 is 4.

And, it undermines your credibility, which is approaching zero.

For, if you will not acknowledge that Seminole is far from flat, and that Ross was wrong, then you're a fraud, and calling yourself a historical researcher becomes a joke.

Why would you want to declare or support an obviously false and erroneous declaration that Seminole is FLAT.

As to the LIRR/Hamilton B Hearst/Pat Mucci contention of yours, the betting window remains perpetually open to you.

Put up or shut up as they say.

And, yes, I have seen Ross's detailed hole by hole plans of Seminole, including elevation lines.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I'd hazard a guess that Ross's alleged comment may have been directed toward Gulfstream or Boca Raton, but certainly not Seminole.

Ray Charles could tell that Seminole wasn't FLAT.

And, I would bet that Tom MacWood researched and viewed the Terra Server topos I referenced, so he knows the property isn't flat, but can't admit it and he can't admit that he, the self proclaimed historical researcher made a colossal blunder.

Hence, if he's disengenuous in his failure to acknowledge that Seminole ISN"T FLAT, is he disengenuous in discussing other issues ?  Intellectual dishonesty doesn't confine itself to a sole issue.  False in one, false in many.

Brad Klein had this to say in "Remembering Donald Ross"

It would be interesting to learn the name of this architect who proposed leveling the MASSIVE 40-foot sand ridge that would ultimately give Seminole its distinctive character.

In an area  known for lack of elevation, such a landform was to be treasured rather than destroyed.

Ross did n not share the idea of taking down the ridge and using the soil to fill the low areas of this site; this would have made the tract no different than 100 other Florida layouts.  His instincts for using the native lay of the land would not allow him to entertain so grandiose an earthmoving project as moving 100,000 or so cubic yards of dirt.  Nor would his sense of modest budgets indulge in such a project.

Quite to the contrary, he used the ridge to BOLD effect, making it a central point of the routing.  Indeed, the genius of the two returning nines is that each one twice visits the highest point of the ridge..... The result is that fully four greens and four tees are situated atop it, without in any way creating a sense of undue crowding.

On the contrary, visitors to this day REVEL in the long views of both the ocean and the entire golf course afforded them from this unique vantage point.

Anyone who visits the site is impressed with the elevation changes afforded by the two dunes that run through the property in a north-south direction, and Ross's use of them.

When Tom MacWood emphatically declares that Seminole is FLAT it's indicative of his blind acceptance and allegiance to questionable if not totally inaccurate information that he's come into possesion of, failure to verify the facts and a failure to personally visit and investigate any site before drawing conclusions, especially emphatic ones.

He claims that he's a historical researcher, but, how can anyone who claims Seminole is FLAT be taken seriously ?

How can anybody who accepts ANY quote he's read as the gospel, without investigating it to verify if the facts or the quote are accurate ?

That's not being a historical researcher, that's being intellectually dishonest... a fraud.

[wsmorrison]

The last word is in.  The hole 4-A drawing is from the 9-hole course on land occupied today by the driving range, swimming pool and practice area.  I saw Ross's 1926 routing map in Aronimink's beautiful clubhouse and it shows the hole nearly the same as on the sketch that Tom MacWood posted.  The course was as follows:

1-A 368 yards, 2-A 451, 3-A 146, 4-A 541, 5-A 363, 6-A 416, 7-A 181, 8-A 408 and 9-A 309.

There are 2 hole drawings in the dining room next to the men's grill room.  These looked like originals and match the copies we have.  

Hole 6 mentioned that "Bunkers 1-2-3-4 finished above 4'-6" deep-keep faces low.

Hole 2 "No 3 + 4 bunkers with raised faces and finished approximately 4' deep.  

In fact going over the plans, hole 1 had faces raised slightly, hole 3 had faces low, hole 4 bunkers with raised face, nothing mentioned on 5, hole 7 had a bunker with a face raised "sufficient to be seen from tee," hole 8 had some bunkers with raised faces, hole 9 had a bunker with a slightly raised face, holes 10, 11, 12 and 13 not mentioned, hole 14 with a bunker face to be clearly seen from tee, hole 15, 16 and 17 nothing mentioned, and a "knoll face" on one bunker on 18.

It would seem that Ross wanted a variety of bunker faces on his very detailed plans.