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.


TEPaul

Sully:

Answer those two questions in reply #148.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Francis claimed responsibility for the land swap that resulted in a 130-by-190 yard parcel of land that made room for the 15th green and 16th tee.

On the Nov. 15 1910 aerial that parcel is Merion property, indicating the swap had happened before that.

You have told us that the road was simply a proposed road at that date, on that drawing and that this allows for the land-swap to have simply been an adjustment to the shape of the S-curve...not possible.

This reshaping you have been trying to sell cannot come close to 130-by-190.

Oh...and I'm pretty sure he was out there before 11/15/1910 because everyone else was too...






Mike_Cirba

I do think Sully is onto something.

I'm not sure what yet, but I sense he's got the right scent.

And, it's not the scent of the Bents of Le Touquet.  ;)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Griscom was involved before November 15 as well.  He brought in M&W.   So by your logic we should move M&W's vist to 1911, because in your world no one on the Construction Committee was allowed to do anything until January 1911.   Not even Lloyd who was on the site Committee.   Or does your rule only apply to Francis?

Did it ever occur to you that Francis might have been appointed to the Construction Committee because of his earlier, pre-purchase involvement fitting the course into the plan.

Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
David,

Who was on the Design Committee?

Mike_Cirba

Did it ever occur to you that Francis might have been appointed to the Construction Committee because of his earlier, pre-purchase involvement fitting the course into the plan.

David,

David,

What plan?   

This is the type of consistent unproven, disproven nonsense you spout here.

You have never proven that there was a plan prior to 1911, not even close.   

You state these things as if you have proven them.

Why not just ask them as questions, instead of insulting everyone's intellingence by presenting them as coming down from the mountaintop by divine decree.

Do you have the slightest idea how insulting and condescending that is?   Do you wonder why your posts draw such emotional reactions, despite our better natures?   Or, do you somehow enjoy that?

It really isn't a very attractive trait...you'd really do better to show a little modesty and a more cooperative attitude in this search, especially when one of your two pillars of belief just got knocked flatter than the walls of Jericho.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
David,

Who was on the Design Committee?
That's what I am trying to figure out.
____________________________________________
Did it ever occur to you that Francis might have been appointed to the Construction Committee because of his earlier, pre-purchase involvement fitting the course into the plan.

David,

David,

What plan?   

This is the type of consistent unproven, disproven nonsense you spout here.

You have never proven that there was a plan prior to 1911, not even close.   

You state these things as if you have proven them.

I am not here to prove anything to you.   Just trying to figure it out myself.   

I write on here is based on the facts as I know them.  And the facts as I know them indicate that there was a plan before November 15, 1910.   You can disagree, but unless and until you actually do so in substance, then your disagreement is irrelevant to me. 

Quote
It really isn't a very attractive trait...you'd really do better to show a little modesty and a more cooperative attitude in this search, especially when one of your two pillars of belief just got knocked flatter than the walls of Jericho.

One of my "two pillars of belief just got knocked flatter than the walls of Jerico?"   I am not surprised that you have misunderstood CBM letter and my "two pillars of belief."  Why should it be any different than anything else. 
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

"Did it ever occur to you that Francis might have been appointed to the Construction Committee because of his earlier, pre-purchase involvement fitting the course into the plan."


Using the same logic, did it ever occur to you why Hugh Wilson MIGHT HAVE ;) been appointed as the CHAIRMAN of the committee Francis served on??

Oh, that's right, sorry, I forgot, your essay explained that----it was because Wilson just sat there doing nothing until Jan 1911 perfecting his roll as a NOVICE. ;) What could be more logical than that?  Sorry, I must have forgotten, and that must be why you think your essay's premises and conclusion are no interesting and novel. ;)

Patrick_Mucci


"What you have failed to pick up on is my inclination that the land swap idea did happen well before Nov. 15 1910...when these guys were just noodling over ideas about how and why and where the holes should go."


Is it your belief that Merion purchased the land WITHOUT knowing if a good golf course could be created on that land.

Or, is it more reasonable to assume that they knew what the routing would be and as a result consumated all of the land deals necessary to implement that routing ?
[/color]


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Pat,

I think they knew pretty well where they wanted the golf course to go when they invited CBM to have a look.

Patrick_Mucci

Pat,

I think they knew pretty well where they wanted the golf course to go when they invited CBM to have a look.

I'd tend to agree with that.

Mike_Cirba

I'd tend to agree with that to a very general extent, but how does that jive with Connell bringing in Barker to propose a 100 acre routing just 10 days or so prior to Macdonald?

I would like to hear Sully's detailed thoughts on why he thinks it was prior to then.   I think it's very possible and almost sensible that they would have done so, and then brought in a couple of experts like Barker and Macdonald to make sure they weren't too far afield or missing something obvious.    It sounds like Barker might have viewed it as a business opportunity and submitted a plan, and Macdonald recognized that they wanted him for exactly what they said, and put them on the general right track suggesting they contact Baltusrol and then the Agro Dept. to do the soil sample thing.   That to me doesn't sound far-fetched, but I'm also not sure it's supported by all of the evidence.

Here's the thing though, and I'm not sure anyone has specifically written this;  in fact, as I'm typing here it just hit me like a ton of bricks!   :o :o :o

Throughout all of this David has argued, and very correctly I now believe, that the routing had to be in place by November 1910 because that 130x190 piece of land that we know as the "Francis Swap" fits the exact dimensions of the land that was recommended on that map that was sent to the membership.   David Stamm virtually proved that with his overlay, and the fact that the land in question measures exactly that as David Moriarty showed us on Google Earth was something I couldn't previously effectively dispute.  The reason I couldn't dispute it is because I now think David Moriarty was absolutely correct in his understanding.

If we know that the specific land for the golf course, including the 130x190 area at the northernmost point that is today's 15thgreen/16thtee, was recommended in the summer of 1910 and purchased by November of that year...and we now know that the Barker routing was discarded and Macdonald didn't submit a routing...

David also contends, as Hugh Wilson wrote, that the Construction Committee wasn't formed until after the land was purchased in January 1911.   If we believe that is accurate, then it also seems that the visit of Wilson and Committee to NGLA took place around that time.   

But by then, we know a routing existed and that it wasn't Macdonald's or Barkers, so that would rule out Macdonld doing the routing at NGLA when they came to visit him.


HOLY CRAP!   Ironically, I think David has just virtually proven that the Merion members routed and designed Merion.   :o
« Last Edit: May 11, 2008, 11:23:36 PM by MichaelPaulCirba »

TEPaul

When all these Merion/Macdonald threads and IMO pieces are said and done, I believe (as I said on that "What Can We Learn" thread) that there needs to be a really good review ON HERE OR ELSEWHERE (perhaps on this new USGA Architecture Archive) about both HOW and WHY this website or people interested in golf and architecture generally, have come to this point in their opinions and conclusions and discussions or even their general interest in the architectural history of Merion East, and what it all means for extremely interested researchers as well as for a club like Merion!

Some things have turned up that need to be considered as to why they haven't been considered or reported before or perhaps as specifically or accurately as some might expect. I think I can say with confidence that they may indicate that real events were not as participants on here are or have been speculating and discussing and concluding, and perhaps not even as the history books have reported and most certainly not as this essay "The Missing Faces of Merion" has hypothecized and/or concluded.  ;)

The course of events back then probably need to be reanalyzed but it is up to the club and its members to do that first. If any of you can't understand that or accept it, then, in my opinion, that's your problem and not Merion G.C's.

It's too early to tell, but it seems to me Hugh Irving Wilson and his committee and what they really did do with the routing and design and construction of the first phase of Merion East will be vindicated and confirmed, and even C.B Macdonald and what he did for them will be seen in a new light that will completely explain the validity of the reports of both Hugh Wilson in 1916 and Alan Wilson in 1926---just as I always suspected and suggested!

Let them reanalyze their own archives FIRST before any of you demand information and certainly access which is their call and not yours. I think I can pretty much guarantee you they have nothing remotely to hide about their history or their architect or their architecture! Try to respect Merion G.C., all of you, and the likes of member Wayne Morrison who has done so much work on behalf of Merion's architectural history, as well as trying to explain things to GOLFCLUBATLASERS.




« Last Edit: May 12, 2008, 08:53:44 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

This exchange of yesterday belongs on this thread because the subject of this thread is specifically about Richard Francis’s late night land swap idea that led to the realization of the 15th green and Merion’s famous #16 “Quarry” hole. The question is did Francis’s idea happen in 1911 or did it happen, as Moriarty maintains, before November 15 1910?

It is extremely important to establish the actual YEAR of this event and whether it happened before November 15, 1910 or if it happened at some point in 1911. Matter of fact, the entire premise and conclusion of his essay hinges on this event taking place in 1910!! For Moriarty to be able to CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN Macdonald offered MCC a routing plan in 1910 he must place this Francis land swap idea before November 15, 1910 or his entire conclusion that Macdonald did a routing in 1910 completely falls apart.

Before we show why it happened in 1911 I’d like to see him explain to the readers of these Merion/Macdonald threads how he thinks he can prove it happened in 1910. What you are going to see is what really specious and really dangerous reasoning is all about and how someone can completely distort the architectural history of a great golf course and pull the wool over the eyes of the unsuspecting with truly specious reasoning past off as FACT.


Yesterday Moriarty said:
"No contradiction.  They were trying to work it out in 1910.   Francis told us that, and so far no facts contradict this."


TEPaul responded:
“Is that right?
You show me and all of us WHERE Francis told us his landswap idea HAPPENED in 1910! And if you can't do that what are you going to do next Moriarty, just dismiss it or ignore it again?”

Moriarty’s answer was:
“Francis told us the details of the swap, and Merion's Board and the map they distributed provide the information necessary to date it.”

I am challenging David Moriarty to actually show us HOW and WHY he has any factual evidence to DATE this event to 1910!  I'm challenging him to show us HOW Francis’ story provides a scintilla of evidence that this event took place before November 15, 1910 and I’m challenging him to provide a scintilla of evidence that anything MCC’s board provided including that Nov, 1910 map provides information or evidence that can date Francis’ land swap idea event in 1910.

THIS event is NOT incidental at all----it is the single event he cannot ignore and consequently his entire essay hinges on dating this event BEFORE Nov, 15, 1910. If any of you don't understand why this event is so crucial I'll be glad to explain it!

That Francis story did not take place in 1910, it took place in 1911 and we believe we can now prove it but that’s not the point at all. THE POINT IS Moriarty does not now have what we do which we need club permission to disseminate. He never had this material but nevertheless he attempted to take an event that happened in 1911 and place it before November 15, 1910, and furthermore he continues to say to thisday he has evidence to prove it.

So, David Moriarty, you’re on, let’s see you try to prove it to us, and what we will see exposed is some really specious and syllogistic reasoning with which he created what he calls factual premises to support his conclusion that Macdonald offered a routing in 1910 that Wilson and committee simply constructed to in 1911.

Don’t weasel out of it this time, David Moriarty and don’t try to dismiss it or ignore it or deflect it to some other subject such as why we need to get permission from the clubs to release recent information. And for God Sake DO NOT just tell us to read your essay AGAIN to find how you think you can prove this. Most of us have read your essay many times and we don’t need to do that again, that’s for sure!

On the other hand, if, at this point, you want to reconsider this premise and the conclusion of your entire essay that Macdonald provided a routing in 1910 that Wilson and committee simply constructed to in 1911, and admit now that that just didn't happen we'd be glad to accept that which will actually put us on the very same page that we've been trying to explain to you for a month now.

But if you don't want to concede this point now then SHOW US HOW YOU CAN PROVE Francis’ LAND SWAP IDEA TOOK PLACE BEFORE NOV. 15 1910!!!   



TEPaul

On May 4th on his first post (#11) on this thread David Moriarty said:

"Tom and Jeff,
I am glad to have a discussion about this issue, but it seems largely factual to me, and thus does not leave too much to discuss.
Francis' words, in context with the Nov. 15 plan, make a strong case for concluding that the land swap (and therefore the routing) took place before this date."




I would hope that David could help us out here and explain what exactly he means in that last sentence---eg 'Francis' words, in context with the Nov. 15 (1910) plan'......."

The problem with Francis' words in his story is he doesn't mention the date of his land swap idea. However, he does mention a number of other things in his story that seems to put his land swap idea into a certain chronological order of events to do with the creation of Merion East. Although there are many interesting words in his story that need to be analyzed in the overall chronology of events to do with the creation of Merion East, some of those words in his story are; "......spending hours over a drawing board and running instruments in the field and just plain talking".

If he was doing that before November 15, 1910, which was up to two months before he would be appointed to the Construction Committee that Wilson chaired I wonder who he was referring to when he said, 'and just plain talking'.

David Moriarty says he doesn't think Wilson could've been involved at that point simply because his committee had not yet been appointed.

Was Francis '...just plain talking' only with Lloyd? (Moriarty mentions Lloyd was out there with Francis, but I'm not sure why David Moriarty only picked Lloyd as the only other one from the yet-to-be-formed committee).

Lloyd would be appointed to that committee too in early 1911 but why would he be out there in 1910 working on a Macdonald routing if Hugh Wilson (and the other future members, Toulmin and Griscom) weren't?

But again, I really do wonder what David Moriarty means when he say;   "Francis' words, in context with the Nov. 15 plan, make a strong case for concluding that the land swap (and therefore the routing) took place before this date."

I guess if one took any event and story that the author did not date and put it "in the context" of some other date and then simply didn't bother to consider or even discuss all the other surrounding evidence in Francis' story and the larger context of Merion Ardmore, then it may look like it might makes some sense.

Francis' story needs to be analyzed in the context of everything else that went on with the creation of Merion East and the Construction Committee and that is the whole point of this particular thread.


« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 07:15:51 PM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

TEPaul,

The answer may lie in the possibility that there were preliminary plans for the golf course.

It's possible that numerous plans/routings were created, with some having different property boundaries, perhaps, not unlike Sand Hills, and it's also possible that the powers that be, recognized that the best plan/routing was the one/s which incorporated land not presently owned by Merion.  And as such, the desire and process for obtaining the remaining piece of the puzzle might have already been underway once they recognized that that configuration was the best of all plans/routings.

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
You guys need to get a room.

Can anyone verify if section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code was applicable at the time of these land transfers.  Sorry, that's all I've got.

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

TEPaul

"TEPaul,

The answer may lie in the possibility that there were preliminary plans for the golf course.

It's possible that numerous plans/routings were created, with some having different property boundaries, perhaps, not unlike Sand Hills, and it's also possible that the powers that be, recognized that the best plan/routing was the one/s which incorporated land not presently owned by Merion.  And as such, the desire and process for obtaining the remaining piece of the puzzle might have already been underway once they recognized that that configuration was the best of all plans/routings."


Hmmmm, Patricio, it looks like you may be getting warm! ;)

I think the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth hopefully is going to get "out there". Do you think it makes any difference who puts it out there?
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 12:15:44 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

It looks like avoidance and the art of ignoring questions and analysis is your best policy, right David Moriaty?? Or do you have the guts to deal with posts #163 and #164?  ;)

TEPaul

Sully:

Looking back through some of the posts on here I can see how confused you were about what I was saying about that triangle in the 1910 plan just being added onto later with land to its west to create enough width to fit the 15th green and 16th tee into. Clearly the reconfiguring of the proposed road (Club House Road) is what did it. That road reconfiguring (Francis' late night idea) happened in 1911 and not before Nov. 15, 1910.

There's a scale on that 1910 plan and the base of that triangle measures a little less that 100 yards so that proves around 30+ yards was added to its width by Francis' idea.

« Last Edit: May 22, 2008, 07:05:06 AM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

I'm looking at the same map, and it's clear that it's drawn to scale, as it was as an engineering map by Pugh and Hubbard, Civil Engineers, showing the exact locations proposed for purchase to the Merion membership.

I agree that it looks to be about 90 yards wide at its widest point at the bottom of the triangle.   

If the map is accurate, and we have no reason to believe that it's not, the Francis Land Swap had to take place after 11/15/1910.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 12:21:37 PM by MikeC »

TEPaul

"If the map is accurate, and we have no reason to believe that it's not, the Francis Land Swap had to take place after 11/15/1910."


Mike:

That's exactly what I've been saying for about a month since it hit me that what was done here by Francis and Lloyd was simply to move the configuration of land for the course and the Residential development around by reconfiguring the road which wasn't even built until around 1912.

I'm afraid some others on here even thought or still think that the Haverford College property line on the west went all the way over to about where Club House Road is now. Haverford College land never went over there----that entire area right up to College Ave was about a 15 acre block of the old Johnson Farm.

It's really pretty simple once one puts all the surrounding events together. All this was resolved by an April board meeting because it's actually reflected in the minutes. I think some have also gotten confused by the mention of an additional 3 acres at that time, but that was not this triangle it was the P&W land next to the clubhouse.

It probably will be hard for others to understand all this but Wayne and I do and Merion's historian does or will.

So, this triangle was not created in 1910 by Francis' idea it was basically just reconfigured and made wider to get that green and tee up into and that did not happen in 1910, it happened in 1911 after the Construction Committee was formed.

There's also direct written evidence that there was no routing in 1910 and matter of fact the purchase structure that was put in place between HDC and MCC includes the specific position Lloyd had just to be able to do this very thing----eg move around boundary lines between proposed golf course land and residential development land. Lloyd's position in this way between HDC and proposed golf ground was not even an accident, it was all preconceived!
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 01:20:00 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

Duh...I guess some of us are a bit slow on the uptake!   :-[    ;)

I went back and re-read this thread and the only one who got what you were saying originally was Jeff Brauer, back on page one, but I'm sure that's because he's a professional and would look closely at things like "scale", etc..

For my part, I just looked at the map that was published with David's story and assumed that the triangle fit the 130 by 190 dimensions that was stated, especially after your mistake about the area being 250 yards wide.   It also seemed based on the way Francis worded it that the land swap involved the entire acreage, but it's clear once you look at the details that it didn't.

I think what really threw me off course was the superimposition of a modern day aerial over the 1910 land map that Bryann Izatt did back a few weeks ago, where it appeared without close inspection that it was a neat fit.

I went back and looked at that superimposition again today, and I see that it isn't a good fit...not at all, which explains very clearly why most of us had no idea what the hell you were talking about Tom.  ;D

In any case, great find, and that certainly solves a big part of this puzzle.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 02:39:54 PM by MikeC »

TEPaul

Mike:

The reason that occured to me weeks ago is because after looking at the configuration of that proposed road on that 1910 plan particularly as it comes off College Ave on the north I just realized that is not the way Club House Road is. I mean I've only been down it hundreds of times and some friends of mine live in the big place right on College Ave and Club House Road. The road just swings west between the southern part of their place and the 15th green and hole way more than that proposed road on that 1910 map. If you carry that additional golf course land increase to the west all the way down to just below the 14th green you're picking up quite a bit of real estate. Then the road swings back much more to the east from there to below the 14th tee and gives it back to the residential development. That was Francis' idea and it happened in 1911, not 1910. You also have to figure that when Wilson and his committee got their topo maps of the property done the surveyor took it right off that 1910 map and that triangle up there was just too narrow to get a green and tee up into. So they just reconfigured the road through most of its length just as I explained above.

To me this is just understanding some of the details of Mr Francis' late-night landswap idea. The fact that he went immediately to Lloyd becomes even more important when you look at some of the other details found in those old MCC files.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 03:00:31 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

Yes, I do recall you stating all of that, and I even went so far as to draw up some mockups of how that looked that I sent to you and Wayne, but I got thrown by 1) Bryan Izatt's drawing, which I just scanned very peripherally and thought everything fit, and 2) the fact that a triangle existed in the first place, which I just assumed was the requisite 130x190 yards.

I now see where I was completely wrong, and I made the same mistake that Sully, and others made.   We didn't realize that the triangle at its widest point was only about 70% of what was needed.   

But Jeff Brauer did;

To give proper and due credit, here is what he wrote back on page one;

I am going to assume that DM is correct that the property records show that there was a trianglular parcel up by 15 and 16, and the 11.15.10 Map confirms it.  It was created by a preliminary road design that featured a gentle curve as it entered the north end of the property.

The map also says Golf House Road is only in an approximate location, meaning that HDC and MCC may have agreed that some fine tuning was necessary, but at the same, felt pressure to acquire the land then.  The committee report did stress the need to act now. Perhaps there were some expiring options, tax benefits to HDC or whatever.

My take is that the land deal was basically done, but the parties were still friendly and the routing was known to need some tweaks to create the best golf course.

I don't think the entire 15 Green-16 Tee Triangle was swapped. I think it was enlarged by an acre to partially widen it to 130 yards. It was already 190 yards long.  If the land agreement allowed Merion 120 acres, with the flexibility to take what they needed, then the logical options were to find an acre to give back. or pay HDC for additional another $825 per acre for what might have been wasted land after the club had set a maximum purchase price for itself of $90,000.  Presumably, going back to the well was frowned upon, although I am sure it could have happened.
But it probably would have required new board action to raise funds and they simply wanted to avoid that.

Either way, I have been involved in many housing and golf developments.  Fine tuning of property lines to make sure there is no wasted land is common.  And it would have made sense then as well as now.  As an engineer, Francis realilzed that a small rerouting of Golf House Road - west at 15 green, and a bit east near 14 tee where the routing was only two holes wide (and where they had just secured the rights to the land from the RR for the 13th hole, could be reduced to offset the extra land used at 15 green.

All perfectly natural when trying to stay under 120 acres.  I get the sense that the Nov. 15, 1910 land agreement may have set the maximum acres and Francis simply had to keep under that acreage,  from both sides perspective.

The fact that Francis and Lloyd seem to have worked out the problems of the last five holes (and in contrast to DM's opinions, probably well after 11/10) certainly means they improved the routing on their own, whether portions of what they improved was originally concieved by Barker, CBM or the committee. I believe the land swap story proves the committee made serveral routing tweaks at a minimum. Left unresolved is who drew how much of the "bones" of the routing that they were tweaking, which is the interesting back story.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 03:12:35 PM by MikeCirba »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back