David Moriarty:
Of course I realize that you are beginning to say things on here that you definitely cannot prove at this point but they are potentially interesting nonetheless----perhaps potentially REALLY interesting.
The first one is that Wilson and his committee may've taken a toporaphical map of Merion to NGLA with them and worked on it with Macdonald. I think I can pretty much guarantee that no one has ever thought of that--not us, and not Merion at any point in their history recording or writing.
Unfortunately, no matter which way to Sunday any of us parse the words of either Hugh or Alan Wilson in their reports or anything else about that NGLA trip we are not going to prove Wilson and his committee took a topo map of Merion to NGLA with them and worked on it up there with Macdonald. At least we aren't able to prove it yet. There would definitely have to be something a lot more concrete to prove that other than some assumed timeline events. To even assume that as fact is total speculation on your part, albeit VERY interesting speculation.
But to even begin to assume something like that you should first try to come closer to proving these things which you have not proved because they will be essential in an actual factual timeline;
1. That Macdonald came to Philadelphia before Wilson and the Merion Committee went to NGLA. I don't think I would view that as particularly important in the broad scheme of things but that is what you just implied.
2. That Wilson's trip in 1912 was his first trip to GB on Merion's behalf. You may think you've proven that but I doubt anyone else does.
It is still very much possible that Wilson and his committee may have gone to NGLA in 1910 and that Wilson may've gone to GB in 1910. I just want to remind you that no one wants to see you just slough that off and just begin hereon and forward to act like you've proved there's no way he could've been there earlier. I need to remind you that saying you're convinced of that is most definitely not the same thing as proof of it, and it will not pass for proof of it in this crowd.
Furthermore, if one looks very carefully at Wilson's words about sketches and explanations it most certainly appears they were sketches and explanations of holes abroad and not sketches or explanation of holes or even ideas for them on some Merion topo. Wilson virtually says as much;
"Through sketches and explanations of the right priniciples of the holes that formed the famous courses abroad and had stood the test of time, we learned what was right and what we should try to accomplish with our natural conditions."
It is of course understandable that they would be looking at sketches of holes from abroad because the long told story of the creation of NGLA was that Macdonald brought back sketches and drawings of holes abroad to build NGLA just as the long told story has been that Wilson did the same thing with Merion.
At that point Macdonald may've still been using those sketches from abroad on NGLA and showing Wilson and committee how he was translating those sketches into the holes of NGLA. This would be a pretty effective way to show novices construction ideas and techniques, don't you think? I sure as hell think it is and has been for me. It's just doesn't get much more instructive than actually watching it get done. Try it sometime!
(I must say that even the idea that Wilson and his committee may've taken a topo map of Merion to NGLA is a good one to at least wonder about. I realize that thought could not have come to you before I mentioned the other day that in that first agronomy letter from Wilson to Piper in Feb 1911 Wilson did mention sending a topo map of Merion to Washington. Frankly, I never even remotely thought of that fact in the context that Wilson and committee may've taken one to NGLA with them. Frankly, I don't even remember Wilson mentioning a contour map of Merion to Piper in that first letter.
Obviously the reason for that is that we were always basically looking at these agronomy letters mostly in the context of William Flynn. Now we are looking at them again in an entirely different context.
But even with all this speculation, no matter how interesting it may be or turn out to be, you still do need to answer a pretty important question here which you seem to be continuously avoiding------and that is if Wilson felt that something---anything---that Macdonald or Whigam did for them and the Merion golf course was significant ONCE THEY GOT UNDERWAY in the spring of 1911, then WHY IN THE WORLD DID HE NOT MENTION IT in his report in 1915 when he mentioned what went on during the NGLA trip before the course began???
How do you explain Wilson not mentioning ANYTHING if M&W did something for the actual course that was significant? I just can't explain why he wouldn't have mentioned at least something in that same report where he went into detail about the trip to NGLA
So how do you explain it David? Do you think he was lying? Do you think he forgot? Or do you really think, as most of us do, that Macdonald probably just didn't do anything at that time that was significant enough for Wilson to mention and at this point you just find it too hard to admit that?
But I'll be watching to see if you really do answer this question or if you just continue to avoid it. Believe me, I can certainly understand why you continuously avoid the question.