[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
I don't want to get ahead of David, and therefore, won't address your post,
But, you continue to speculate as to the subject of his premise.
Stop conjecturing."


Patrick:

I should and I will even if there is absolutely no harm in speculating what he may say. If we are completely wrong about what we think he plans to write, then so be it, we will just deal with what he does write when he produces it.

"In addition, to present Alan Wilson's report, as if it's infallible, or to assume that no liberties or embellishment exists within it, is naive."

Patrick:

At this point, I don't think any of us want to play the kind of word games and the kind of games of argumentation with you that you constantly play on this website, and for what really?

We have never presented Alan Wilson's report as INFALLIBLE. None of us ever said anything about the fact that we consider it to be infallible. So, one certainly does need to ask you, at this point, why you say that? The time for you or Moriarty or MacWood or anyone else to keep misquoting us and misconstruing things we have ever said is past now.

We look at Alan Wilson's report as one of the best and most accurate chronicles of how a course of that age was created and by whom then any document of its kind involving a golf course of that age. If you know of a better one for another golf course of that age then show me what it is.

You seem to suggest we're naive? Naive for what reason exactly? Would it be that you think we're naive for not immediately suspecting and concluding that Alan Wilson was some kind of a liar, for being some kind of a purposeful distorter of the truth for some reason such as to glorify his dead brother and his committee at the expense of some other participant such as Macdonald?

I would suggest to you that if he did that when he wrote that report and he was to any significant degree inaccurate or incorrect there were a ton of people around and reading that report who had been a direct part of that entire process that most definitely would've wondered why he did something like that and obviously would have corrected him.

For you or Moriarty or MacWood or anyone else to suggest otherwise would be without any question at all the same thing as you all implying and suggesting that there had been and perhaps continuous to be some kind of massive conspiracy in this town to purposefully hide the truth for some ulterior motive.

I can tell you that some have implied that about Merion as well as some other courses around here including Pine Valley. MacWood did that. It seems Moriarty did that and now you seem to be doing that. This isn't some fanciful notion or defensive notion on my part as the threads on this website very much are the evidence that they did imply that on a number of occassions.

While that may've been a result of the heat of argumentation I can tell you with assurance suggestions like that are truly bullshit and they are that to such an extent it isn't necessary for any of us to even continue to respond to them.

No, Patrick, we do not claim any of those reports are infallible. The reason we support their accuracy is because every other bit of information we've had basically corroborates them and also we have never seen anything at all in them to lead us to believe we should do otherwise than to consider them accurate.

If someone else has something that shows they are inaccurate, in any way, then let them produce it and we'd be happy to consider what it means. To date, noone has ever done that and we seriously doubt anyone ever will be able to do that. 

[RJ_Daley]

I can not believe that the debaters of the historical record of Wilson's movements keep fishing in the same old fished out waters. 

No matter what side of the debate you gents are on, the arguement keeps circling back upon itself with the same known cites.  To date, the version told by the traditionalists (if I may call them that) who use all the contemporaneous to the times, and recent reflections of the founding of Merion, are the debaters in the lead, IMHO. 

All, are waiting, now with a bar of proof set quite high, for David to reveal what else he has that throws a chink in the armour or the traditionalists views on HIW, and Merion's creation. 

If I see another manifest, I think I'm going to puke. 

Answer me these small questions:

Was HIW an ardent and competitive or active amatuer golfer during these times?

Was he known to play and compete in various tournaments or golf outtings of the day?

Did any of the clubs where he might compete keep records of entrants, and scoring?

If HIW travelled to study the courses of GB, is it possible if not probable that he would also play, and compete if there were some tournament action going on?

Has anyone bothered to look for guest book sign-ins (if they possibly exist).


I have seen even in the scrap book of Old Tom Morris, where tournaments recorded players from the U.S. who competed, where they were from and what their score results were.  It seems to me likely the Scots or Brits would have recorded in their papers if a guy like HIW was in a local tournament, or even if he socially visited the club.  It seemed they did for others.

Debaters, and masterdebaters, please fish in new documentary waters for your proofs.  This other stuff has gotten way past its expiration date.

[Mike_Cirba]

If Hugh Wilson did not go to the UK to study golf courses prior to the start of design and construction of Merion's 1912 course now known as the East, what exactly should we infer from that?  Some of us are cautious about reading too much into such a revelation if it should prove true, although I do not think it can be as will be discussed below. 

One idea, seemingly supported by David Moriarty and Pat Mucci, is that it would indicate Hugh Wilson must have had less to do with the initial design of Merion's 1912 course.  Not only that, but a further conclusion put forth is that CB Macdonald and HJ Whigham must have had a greater role since they had recent experience with NGLA.  There was a third man who visited with Macdonald and Whigham, was it Baker?  I haven't seen his name mentioned in proposed attribution, I'm not sure why--probably because it isn't as good a story. 

But what of the committee and Pickering that were there everyday working on the project.  Why don't they consider a greater role for Pickering?  For that matter, they don't consider Francis's reported role and the reminiscences of Hugh and Alan Wilson along with a wealth of contemporary newspaper accounts crediting Wilson and remarking about his trip to the UK before construction. 

The written word is found independently in numerous sources that he did go before the start of construction.  If someone counters that documentation, the burden of proof is theirs.  It is nearly impossible to do so.  If those that claim there is no solid evidence to prove Wilson traveling to study golf courses took place before 1912 wish to stake such a claim, they can only look for evidence that he did go prior to 1912.  The one thing that can be proved is the null hypothesis that Wilson did not go to the UK prior to 1912.  Only by proving the null hypothesis is wrong, that is finding information that he did go earlier, can you conclude anything.  You cannot prove a negative.

Many of us believe that so far, the balance of evidence is towards Wilson going to the UK before construction.  Is it conclusive?  No, not yet.  But frankly, there hasn't been a concerted effort to prove the notion either.  That is the duty of those wishing to disprove the correct null hypothesis in this case.

Again, even if an exhaustive search proves fruitless, that doesn't mean he did not go earlier.  If the doubt of his travels prior to construction become greater, that still doesn't result in a significant conclusion about design attribution without additional evidence.  I suppose that is what David thinks he's found and what will be disseminated to us in time.

Wayne

That's absolutely correct, and sums up everything very well.

The funny, if irritating part of this, is that guys like Shivas and Patrick are all too accepting of information on a manifest that is clearly wrong (like wrong first names, wrong middle initials, wrong marital status) when it suits their purposes, yet neither of them are willing to consider the obvious implications of their willful leaps of logic, and that is;

If Hugh Wilson travelled alone to Europe in 1910, and the shipping company similarly made a mistake with his middle initial, as they did with Crump in 1910, or as they did with Crump's travelling companions first name, or as they did with WIlson's marital status in 1912,

then we would NEVER be able to produce the proof they are supposedly looking for.

If Hugh Wilson travelled with his family on a private vessel before 1912, with friends like former Presidents and Captains of Industr, or travelled alone on a similar vessel

Then we would NEVER be able to produce the proof they are supposedly looking for.

It makes you wonder how much, if any, work they have done to actually find proof of Wilson travelling before 1912.   Or, would they rather try to bolster a negative argument by making the specious and wholly inconclusive argument that unless we find it, it doesn't exist.   

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

Are you talking about the unmarried Hugh Wilson listed on that May 1912 manifest, or the one from Merion who was in Philadelphia in March of that year who was married with two young daughters?

Are you somehow trying to refute contemporaneous accounts, and yes, I used that word again knowing you object, but this isn't men who were trying to tell the story years later who weren't there in the first place, or didn't know Hugh WIlson, or Chaz Macdonald, or HJ Whigham

...these were men who were there through the whole thing who then wrote down what happened RIGHT AFTER IT WAS A HUGE SUCCESS and they gave credit where it was due.   

Men like Tillinghast, and possibly Travis, and William Evans, and Alan Wilson.

But, yes...it was all a conspiracy, designed to minimize the role of Charles Macdonald, who knew so much on his own about architecture prior to Devereux Emmett hand-holding, sketching, going overseas, and helping him EVERY STEP of the way through the design and creation of NGLA that he single-handedly designed that wonderful, visionary piece of architectural work known as the first Chicago Golf Club.   

[Mike_Cirba]

And Shivas, in light of that architectural masterpiece, the fact that Merion has OB on both sides should prove beyond any doubt that it clearly wasn't Charles Macdonald who did the routing!   

[Mike_Cirba]

I went back through that old original thread of Tom MacWood's today, and I think it's getting very interesting to view the timelines, particularly around the two Macdonald visits.

In November 14th of 1910 The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Merion had purchased the 130 or so acres in question on which to build a new course, and another 220 acres were purchased by a land development company to build large lots/houses to sweeten the deal.

The article also mentions that Mr. Horatio Lloyd, prior to the purchase of the ground, had the property examined by CB Macdonald, HJ Whigham, and HH Barker, the "well-known golf players",  "all of whom have pronounced that the ground can be transformed into a golf course the equal of Myopia, Boston, or Garden City, Long Island."    It's interesting that there is no mention of NGLA, and it's also very clear that there is nothing concrete about what is to be built but very vague platitudes at this juncture. 

For instance, the article goes on to say, "work will be commenced at once (in December??)...and no effort or expense will be spared by the Merion Cricket Club in the construction of this course, while ever effort will be made to have this the leading championship course in America."

It is also interesting that the article mentions that the sellers received information "about sixteen months ago (July/Aug 1909) that the Merion Cricket Club desired to procure a permanent golf course"..on larger grounds than what they had been leasing.

In December of 1910, Tillinghast, writing as "Hazard" in American Golfer mentioned, "Mr. R.E. Griscom (later a member of the Hugh Wilson-led Construction Committee - comment mine), had as his guests Mr. C.B. Macdonald and Mr. H.J. Whigham, who have been so prominent in the building of the National Golf Links, at Shinnecock.   Both men pronounced the new land to be admirably suited to the requirements of the game of today."

So, by the end of 1910, we now know exactly what Macdonald and Whigham had done to date.   They visited, and they pronounced, in very, very, very general terms.

The humorous thing is that the land the Merion course is on is certainly no better than any of thousands of acres of surrounding Philly countryside, particularly at that time.   It also had MAJOR disadvantages.   It was oddly L-shaped, it had heavy clay soil, it wasn't wider at any point than a medium length par four, it was intersected right through the middle by a public road, and it had a big ugly quarry up in the northeast quadrant.   You have to wonder what these guys were smoking, or whether they had simply paid lip service.   One can easily imagine both men walking away snickering to themselves, "oh yes...this should any moment supplant NGLA as the finest championship course in America!"   

more to follow...

[Mike_Cirba]

It is now April, 1911, and it has been a long, very harsh winter since the purchase of the new Merion property.

Tillinghast, reporting in the May issue of American Golfer, states;

"The lingering of winter in the lap of spring has seriously interfered with the opening of courses, none of which have been really fit during the month of March, and indeed the middle of April finds them all very backward. 

So, we now can very reasonably assume that nothing much in the way of construction at Merion was able to take place between November 1910 and what is now the middle of April, as Tillinghast writes.

Yet, in the same issue, Tillinghast reports;

"The new course at Merion is nearing completion in the planning."

So, we can now surmise with conviction that what was meant by the contention that work would begin immediately (as reported locally in the Philly Inquirer, mid November of 1910) is that the initial work involved the planning, or the laying out of the golf course!", as is the logical first step on virtually every golf course project before and since.   

Who would have done this important work at that time?  Were Macdonald and Whigham or Barker onsite through this long winter working through how to route the golf course?
Were they the ones working with maps, and surveyors sketches, or doing surveys or topographical mapping?

Again, in the same article, Tillinghast really provides us with the answer;

"During the month (April, 1912), Mr. Charles B. Macdonald and Mr. H.J. Whigham, who have been aiding the Committee, visited the course and expressed themselves as greatly pleased over the prospects.   Mr. Macdonald said in his opinion seven of the holes equalled any in this country, and as our first national champion has played over most of the links, this statement from him should cause much satisfaction."

It is fundamentally critical to read this account in the proper context, and I believe that to do otherwise is responsible for much of the confusion that has occurred on these threads.

First of all, as of this juncture, there was simply NO GOLF COURSE for them to look at, as construction had yet to begin!!     The fact that Tillinghast says Macdonald is pleased at the prospects tells us clearly that there was nothing yet there to see on the ground...only future plans.

What Macdonald and Whigham DID view during that time, and for what seems to be the very FIRST time, were THE PLANS that had been created over the long winter by the Committee, and they viewed those plans in the context of being there on the ground and seeing what the Committee has envisioned and drawn up. 

After doing so, they once again Pronounced, that "seven of the holes will be the equal of any in this country..."...blah, blah, blah.   

Of course, this was pure hyperbole, and based strictly on looking at plans and comparing them visually to the ground on which they YET were to be built, starting that spring, and continuing until the opening of the course a full 17 months later.


more to come...

[TEPaul]

"All they do is recite what's already known:  that Wilson went to Europe before 9/15/12, the date of the first such hearsay reporting."

Shivas:

None of us now need to depend on some newspaper accounts that Wilson went abroad in 1912  sometime before 9/15/12. Perhaps you missed it but the other day I produced proof from Wilson as well as his commttee member Francis that Wilson took a 'hurred trip abroad at some point between his last letter from Philadelphia on March 1, 1912 to Russell Oakley in Washington D.C His next letter to Russell Oakley was on May 21, 1912. That does not mean that was the extent of time he was abroad it only shows the time-frame he was not writing letters to Russell Oakley from Philadelphia. He may've gone in April for all those letters show and he probably came back from Cherbourg on that ship we have the manifest from on May 1, 1912. We don't even know that he went to GB during that trip. The fact he returned from Cherbourg France may indicate he was only on the Continent. Furthermore we don't even know from those "agronomy" letters that he went over there for architecture or for Merion. He may've gone for business or some other reason.

[TEPaul]

RJ Daley said:

"I can not believe that the debaters of the historical record of Wilson's movements keep fishing in the same old fished out waters. 

No matter what side of the debate you gents are on, the arguement keeps circling back upon itself with the same known cites.  To date, the version told by the traditionalists (if I may call them that) who use all the contemporaneous to the times, and recent reflections of the founding of Merion, are the debaters in the lead, IMHO."

RJ:

As I said to you when you expressed that same sentiment about a week or more ago---I could not agree with you more about your perplexity on how these debaters are continuously looking at trips and ship's manifests---eg what you called 'the same old waters.'

As much as both sides have been asked what they think that actually means about who did what at Merion (certainly as refected by the two Wilson reports which logically would be the best and most direct source of information) they continuously neglect to say.

I should also ask along about now if anyone----eg either side, will be disappointed to eventually learn that the thing that very likely concerned all those men back then including Macdonald with his NGLA and Wilson with his Merion and even Macdonald with his advice and counsel to Merion was probably vastly more on the subject of AGRONOMY and not as much as every one seems to expect on the subject of ARCHITECTURE! 

When everyone finally learns what clearly seems to be the truth about that aspect it really will be pretty ironic, don't you think? 

[Mike_Cirba]

There is no evidence that has ever been presented to suggest that Macdonald or Whigham or Barker ever came back after these two visits.   The only other reference to Macdonald in the Merion history is the mention of Wilson and the Committee going out to Long Island to see NGLA for two days and talk about architecture, but accounts of that visit place it in 1910.

As far as any additional evidence of their involvement, none has been presented to date.

The two visits of Macdonald and Whigham to Merion, now seen in their proper historical context, should provide very clear and concise understanding of what exactly they did, and more importantly, what they didn't do.

Given Macdonald's standing in the game, as the first US Champion, and as the "builder" of NGLA, it was such a major event when he came to visit a course that it was reported in the local press, as well as the major golf publications.   He was a celebrity, and he both blessed the land that the committee had been looking at for 16 months and he blessed the plans once they were determined.

All of this is completely consistent with ALL of the reporting of the time, including the Alan Wilson report, which mentions the two visits by Macdonald, and all the other gracious accounts from Lesley and "Far and Sure" mentioning that Charlie had been a big help in "advising the Committee", but we now know that this entailed 1) Blessing the site prior to purchase and 2) Reviewing the layout plans of the Committee prior to construction in April and 3) Entertaining Wilson and the Committee for 2 days at NGLA .

It is also completely consisent with the timelines as addressed in the Merion history books and the accounts of what took place when.

In his account of the history of Merion, Desmond Tolhurst wrote;

"In 1909, the golfers of the Club formed the Merion Cricket Club Golf Association to examine the problem presented by the new ball.   (this is consistent with the Philly Inquirer article about "16 months", prior to Nov 1910)  The Association eventually decided to aquire an L-shaped, 120-acre tract....on both sides of Ardmore Avenue."

"It also appointed a committee to lay out the new course.   The chairman was Hugh Wilson, who was to be the course architect."

"The following year, the Committee sent Wilson to Britain to study the best courses over there.  After seven months abroad, playing coures and studying their design, he returned with a pile of notes, supplemented by surveyor's maps of great holes and his own sketches."

"Construction of the new course began in 1911.  (Spring, as shown above)  On September 12, 1912, the old Haverford course was closed and on September 14, the new East course and clubhouse opened to members."

After re-reading this it occurs to me that it is likely that the "surveyors maps of great holes" (interestingly CONTRASTED with the disclaimer "and his own sketches") were those drawn by Devereux Emmett, and it is likely that he did indeed bring these back from his visit to Macdonald at NGLA.   However, this account seems to make very, very clear that he brought back MUCH more than just the Emmett drawings...he brought back his own notes and his own sketches.   It seems that the writer is clearly stressing the difference here.

But, that is not all...far from it.

The Merion Cricket Golf Club Association Committee that was formed in 1909 with the express purpose of finding a site on which to build a new course was led by Radman Griscom, as mentioned above but also included...Alan Wilson and Hugh Wilson.   BOTH men were there right from the beginning, and part of the VERY Committee that tasked Hugh Wilson to go overseas for the purpose of studying golf courses in 1910.  

When industry titans like Radman Griscom and Robert Lesley asked you to do something, the right response was "how soon?".

Once the land was procured, this SAME Association (that along with the Wilson Brothers, Griscom, and Lesley also included Charlton Yarnall and Walter Stephenson) next appointed a committee to lay out the new course.  It appointed Hugh Wilson as Committee Chairman.

Tom Paul mentioned earlier how Committee member and Enginner Richard Francis's account of the origins of Merion talked about spending countless hours and days ploughing over maps and painstaking, fastidious surveying.

It is now clear that this all began during that long winter, as did the "planning", or laying out of the holes.

From a story by Gary Galyean that ran in the 2005 US Amateur program;

"From the beginning, the L-shape of the Ardmore property presented some routing problems.  Late one night, Mr. Wilson's fellow committeeman Richard Francis found a solution for adding the East course's last five holes.   Mr. Francis later recalled, in 1950, the land exchange that produced America's most important series of closing holes."

""I was looking at a map of the property one night when I had an idea.   Not realizing it was nearly midnight, I called Mr. Lloyd on the telephone, found he had gone to bed, got on my bicycle and rode a mile or so to see him.  The idea was this:  The Club had some property west of the present course, which did not fit in at all with any golf layout.   Perhaps we could swap it for some use?""

""Mr. Lloyd agreed.   The land now covered by fine homes along Golf House Road was exchanged for land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long - the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.   Within a day or two, the quarryman had his drills up where the 16th green now is and blasted off the top of the hill so that the green could be built as it is today.""

"Construction began in the early spring of 1911."

It is clear from Mr. Francis's direct, first-hand account as a member of Hugh Wilson's Committee charged with laying out and building the Merion course that the time he spent with surveyors maps, and drawings, and all the rest happened AFTER the property was first purchased in late 1910, and BEFORE the construction started in the spring of 1911.  

Charley Macdonald's visits to bless the property as suitable for golf in the fall of 1910, and his subsequent visit AFTER the plans were clearly finished in April of 1911 are the only accounts of his involvement with Merion.

Is it any wonder that during the rest of his own lifetime, as Merion went on to become one of the top courses in the country and host of US Amateur tournaments he uttered not a single word complaining that he wasn't given proper credit?

It makes one wonder why some suddenly feel the need to try and advance the idea that he was slighted in his own time, and beyond.   He was anything but a wallflower, so it seems obvious that had any such improper neglect or ignoring of his real contributions to the creation of Merion had actually occured, the world would have certainly heard about it, loud and clear.

[Mike_Cirba]

At this juncture, and with the understanding of those timelines, I think it's important to go back and re-visit the writings of "Far and Sure" in American Golfer that I mentioned earlier.

I had speculated that perhaps "Far and Sure" was Tillinghast, but Phil Young strongly disagreed and mentioned that he thought it was Walter Travis.   I'm still very uncertain who it was and might examine that further if need be.   However, let's look again at what he wrote.

In the October 1912 edition of "American Golfer" he states;

"The new eighteen hole course of the Merion Cricket Club, which has been under construction for more than a year was thrown open to members of the club on Saturday, Sept. 14..."

"The new course...was constructed under the direction of Messrs. Hugh I. Wilson, H.G. Lloyd, R.E. Griscom, R.S. Francis, and H. Toulmin...."

"Some of the famous holes abroad have been reproduced and the course abounds in water and road hazards, although many of the pits and traps remain to be built."


Then, in the January 1913 edition of the same magazine, "Far and Sure" attempts a fuller review of what he's seen at Merion.   Interestingly, the pictures accompanying the article show the trees are completely full of leaves.   Anyone familiar with weather patterns in Philadelphia would recognize that this means that "Far and Sure" had played the course sometime between when the course opened in mid-September 1912 and the end of October, and likely would have written the article at that time, which then made it into the mid-winter issue in January.

It is somewhat astounding at how unfinished the course still appears at this juncture, but that seems also confirmed by an American Cricketer account by Tillinghast around the same time (has anyone found that one yet??) where he is supposed to (according to an account of the article by Jim Finegan) have pointed out that comparatively few bunkers were yet in place.   Tillinghast apparently ended the article by writing;

"I believe that Merion will have (emphasis mine) a real championship course, and Philadelphia has been crying out for one for many years.   The construction committee, headed by Hugh I. Wilson, has been thorough in its methods and deserves the congratulations of all golfers."

Whoever, he was, "Far and Sure" seemed to have much the same impression as Tillinghast on the unfinished state of Merion upon opening.   He wrote;

"Ever since golf was introduced in Philadelphia, the city has been in great need of a course such as Merion has produced, or, I should say, is producing, for the work is still in it's early stages.  

It is important to note that it is now a FULL SEVENTEEN MONTHS since Macdonald stepped on the property to see the layout plans that the Committee devised and the course is still far from finished. 

Far and Sure still notes Macdonald's contributions, if for no other reason than they seem to be personal friends, or at least golf aquaintances;

"I had heard much of the plans and reports of the progressing work, but not until a month ago did I find the opportunity of seeing it.   Two years ago, Mr. Chas. B. Macdonald, who had been of great assistance in an advisory way (interesting to note the way he words that compliment almost exactly like Robert Lesley and Alan Wilson) told me that Merion would have one of the best inland courses he had ever seen, but every new course is "one of the best in the country" and one must see to believe after trying it out."

So, what do we know about "Far and Sure" at this point?

We know he knows Charles Macdonald enough to have conversed with him about golf.

We know he had heard much of the plans and reports of the progressing work at Merion.

We also know that he was NEVER there during the design and construction phases of the golf course, and that this was his initial visit to the property.


Despite the somewhat early stages of course development, "Far and Sure" continues;

"Everything indicated careful, intelligent preparation and painstaking development."

"It is too early to attempt an analytical criticism of the various holes for many of them are but rough drafts of the problems, conceived by the construction committee headed by Mr. Hugh I. Wilson."

So, despite a few folks here recently seeming to want to split infinitives again about the meaning of "Construction Committee", Far and Sure points out very clearly that this group is tasked with the DESIGN of the course, and creating the internal strategies and problems, and what's more, they are the ones who "conceived" of the holes and their challenges.

Far and Sure continues;

"Mr. Wilson visited many prominent British courses last summer, searching for ideas, many of which have been used."  

Let's examine this statement for a moment.   Far and Sure doesn't seem to be quite an insider on the players at Merion proper.   At the time he played Merion for the first time and wrote this the leaves were still on the trees, and it was very likely to have been mid-September, or actually STILL summer of 1912.   We also know from what Tom Paul found about the dates and postmarks of the Hugh Wilson letters to Piper/Oakley that he could NOT have gone to Europe in the summer of 1911, as I had speculated earlier.   So, what does this leave us with?

1) Not being an expert on what took place at Merion prior to his visit, he could have made a mistake and not known it was actually TWO summers prior in 1910.

2) He could have been refering to the trip that David speculates was made in the spring of 1912, which we now know, if it took place, happened sometime after early March 1912 and ended May 1st.   We also know that on that voyage, Wilson reportedly had a ticket for the Titanic, which went down on April 15th, but that he got somehow delayed.   Does anyone really believe that this trip, that might have been as short as a few weeks, was the one that the Merion committee sent him on to study all the great courses abroad, not only those in Scotland and England, but also according to David, France as well?   That seems to me to be preposterous.  Besides, if this was the trip that Far and Sure was talking about I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have said "summer" if the trip happened in the frigid March/April timeframe.

3) He could have been wrong and Wilson never went overseas to study golf courses.  That seems unlikely given all of the accounts including this one, but it makes absolutely no sense that the Committee would not have sent him prior to March/April 1912, and then only for a few weeks, and after the course had been laid out, as has been offered as the new version of the truth.   If Wilson never travelled before that short trip in 1912, as has been contended, then it's just as likely he never went at all.


In any case, "Far and Sure" does seem to have learned a bit on his visit about what Wilson and his Committee have been striving for on various holes.   He goes on;

"For example, an attempt to reproduce the Eden green at St. Andrews has been made at the fifteenth and, in my opinion, it has resulted in one of the few failures...."

"Many of the imported ideas of hazard formation are good, and the grassy hollows of Mid-Surrey have been well introduced.   On some of the sand mounds I noticed the growing of something which looked suspiciously like the bents of Le Touquet."

"However, I think that the very best holes at Merion are those which are original, without any attempt to closely follow anything but the obvious."


The full American Golfer article, including the pictures that show the time of year from the leaves on the trees and the clothing of the golfers can be found at the following link;

Please judge for yourselves

http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1913/ag93m.pdf

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba said:

"They visited, and they pronounced, in very, very, very general terms.


Shivas responded:

"See, Mike, when you draw conclusions like that, I really have to wonder about your logic.  Two guys wrote two things that indicate two things that CMB and his buddies did, and you conclude that that's all they did.
Mike went to church this morning.  Mike went to the grocery store this afternoon.  Therefore, that's all Mike did today."

Shivas:

There's another off-the-wall analogy on your part that's not applicable to the subject at hand here.

Let's say C.B. Macdonald spent a day or even two here in Nov. 1910 and again in April 1911. Hugh and Alan Wilson probably did neglect to report ALL that C.B did that day and they probably neglected to report it on purpose such as "Charlie got a handful of hookers on Wednesday night and perhaps again on Thursday night and it seemed he got pretty well drunk with them and pretty well laid too."

Again, nice analogy counselor!

"Objection, your Honor, Shivas' analogy completely lacks relevance to the case---eg Macdonald's part in Merion."

Judge: "Objection sustained!"

  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

I agree with you---I think "Far and Sure" is Tillinghast.

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Your missing the timeline.

Wilson went abroad in 1910, before the property was purchased and work was to begin.

The rest of what you wrote is simply trying to mislead the audience and blow smoke.

You are holding a pair of threes.

[TEPaul]

"Tom, once again you miss the point.   "

Shivas:

Perhaps I did miss your point. It's not hard to do as it is often either irrelevant or inapplicable to the subject of the discussions of some of these threads.  

Again, one point you made will always amuse me. It was the one you informed us with your sentence parsing skills that H. Wilson was referring to the Merion Committee when he used the word "we" and yet he wasn't referring to the committee when he used the word "our".  

That's a pretty neat trick of yours, Shivas, considering you've never read Hugh Wilson's report.  

Let me ask you something Shiv. Is it something one learns in law school that if and when you say something in court and it's clear that noone, including the judge and jury believes a word of it that one should just stick to one's guns anyway? Perhaps they teach you that so it can go into the court record and at some point down the line you can just take it out of context and pertend that you actually made some relevant point.

[TEPaul]

"Yet another fallacious conclusion.  I'd be writing the exact same thing if it was just you and me talking.  Thus, your conclusion that I'm trying to mislead is false.  Of course, even if it weren't, it's faulty because you don't have a basis for drawing it.   "


MikeC:

Do you believe that last statement?!? What a bunch of garbage. Do some of these lawyers think  people actually believe what they're saying simply because they're talking? 


You know what we ought to do with Shivas, MikeC? We should take him to see Barry B. Barry wouldn't just throw him out of his office, he'd probably throw him out of the window of his 10th floor office!

[JESII]

Shivas,

So the architect, who was on the committee, was sent to Europe in 1910, before the land was purchased.  Thus, he was unable to see the land before he started learning over there.  All because two titans of industry, not to be denied, decided to send their chosen architect to Europe before he saw the land they wanted him to build on? 

And this makes sense to you?  

And this architect, on the committee, didn't say "hey guys, don't you think it'd be a good idea if you're going to double-task me, that I see the land we're going to build on first, before I go, so I know what'll work on our land?"

That last bit is the worst line of reasoning I have read on these 95 pages of Merion threads...I am impressed.

[TEPaul]

"So the architect, who was on the committee, was sent to Europe in 1910, before the land was purchased.  Thus, he was unable to see the land before he started learning over there.  All because two titans of industry, not to be denied, decided to send their chosen architect to Europe before he saw the land they wanted him to build on?"


Shivas:

Look, if you're going to try to discuss this subject seriously at least try to learn some of the facts surrounding Merion instead of just playing word and logic games with some of us. The land that Merion sits on and more was purchased in June 1909. The Merion Cricket Club Golf Association purchased a part of it in late 1910. Believe me, Hugh Wilson and his committee of Merion members knew that land for well over a year before since the people who purchased it were all his clubmates.  

[TEPaul]

"That last bit is the worst line of reasoning I have read on these 95 pages of Merion threads...I am impressed."


Sully:

It's not just the worst line of reasoning, it's just another example by Shivas, that like a number of people on these Merion threads, basically they don't know shit about the details of the entire history of Merion and they probably never will.

But yet, for some odd reason, they think it's appropriate that they reinterpret it to set its historical record straight. 

[TEPaul]

"Yeah, it's a neat trick.  Learned it from priests and nuns a long, long time ago.  At "our" school, "we" worked on this stuff all the time."


Well, thank God Hugh Wilson didn't learn your 'neat trick'. Apparently they didn't teach it when he went to Princeton!   

Furthermore, maybe now is not the best time to brag about things like the "neat tricks" you learned from a bunch of priests and nuns a long, long time ago since most of their charges seem to be saying too many of them were a bunch of cruel perverts.

Shivas, I hate to say this about what you say on here most of the time but the more you talk on here the more you prove the adage----"if you give him enough rope he will hang himself everytime."  

[DMoriarty]

Jeez Guys,  is this matter so pressing that you can't wait to tear down my IMO until I actually post it?   

How can any of you expect to keep an open-mind when you are already refuting and discounting an essay you have never seen?   
____________________
Dick the Decider, 

I am losing before I say anything?   I thought that only happened with my wife!
________________________

Mike,

I guess you figure I have had enough space?

Sheesh.
   

[TEPaul]

"Jeez Guys,  is this matter so pressing that you can't wait to tear down my IMO until I actually post it?   

How can any of you expect to keep an open-mind when you are already refuting and discounting an essay you have never seen?"


David:

Don't worry about it. You should actually be thanking us for all this. It's obviously continuing to supply you with information you may never have known and you can actually use it to tailor your assumptions and conclusions accordingly in your IMO piece.

Just look at all this as a form of something like legal "discovery".

    

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

RJ Daley,

Don't worry about that, it's being taken care of.
That's one of the things delaying the presentation.
Fact checking.

David Moriarty must be chuckling at all the speculation and pursuit of false leads.

Mike Cirba,

Why are you blindly accepting reports that conflict with themselves ?

Shivas,

All will be explained in good time.

I'm as surprised by the illogical thought patterns and conclusions as you are.

TEPaul, Mike Cirba and others.

You're like the three blind men examining the elephant.

One has hold of his tusk and decrees that an elephant is a mollusk.

The other has hold of his ear and decrees that an elephant is a large leaf like plant.

The third has hold of it's trunk and decrees that an elephant is a serpent.

Individually, and COLLECTIVELY, they haven't got a clue as to what constitutes an elephant.

And, so it is with those attempting to decree what David Moriarty will present.

And, the funny thing is... not only are they decreeing what he will present, they're offering refutations of a premise not yet presented.

This is very funny.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike (& others),

Regarding the identity of "Far and Sure" and whether he was Tilly, in the June 1911 issue of the American Golfer, the column "Eastern Pennsylvania Notes" is authored by "Far and Sure" and 5 pages later the column "Middle Atlantic Notes" is authored by "Hazard."

If Tilly had written both he would have had both columns together rather than separate...

[Mike_Cirba]

MikeC:

You know what we ought to do with Shivas, MikeC? We should take him to see Barry B. Barry wouldn't just throw him out of his office, he'd probably throw him out of the window of his 10th floor office!

Tom,

This is amusing to say the least.  

I put together a thread, which really attempts to timeline exactly what is known to date, based on all of the historical accounts that have surfaced, and I somehow manage to bring first Shivas, and then David, and finally Patrick out of the woodwork in a panic.

I think they doth protest too much!  

Either that or I've hit very close to the mark.  

The funny thing is, that they claim that this is somehow put out there to refute David's new evidence and theories when he has yet to present either.

I think the only mention of David in what I wrote tonight is saying that I believe he is claiming that Hugh Wilson's only visit to Europe happened in 1912, and that he went to France during that time, as well, and I'm suggesting that trip based on what else we know seems to be a preposterously short amount of time to visit, play, and study all the great courses of Europe!

David,

This was neither an incivil attack on you, or your theories, as they have yet to be presented.

It was an attempt to look at the timeline based on what we've learned since we last debated these points, what's been uncovered by guys like Joe Bausch during that period, and see how it all fits together.

You may very well have some new evidence that would cause me to reconsider, or even reject what I've just put together here.   As I mentioned earlier, I'm open to that possibility and look forward to seeing what you have new to offer.

However, based on what we know to date, it seems that it's less of a "puzzle" than an open-and-shut case.  

The jury is still awaiting the prosecution's case, however...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()