[Phil Benedict]

George,

The next thing you'll confess to is being the guy on the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza!

[George_Bahto]

needs now is a good Michelle Wie thread

Paula Creamer would do nicely - hot!!     and can play

[Jeff_Brauer]

'Jeff,

The difference is that Alan Wilson was speaking what others had said and written all along.   Yesterday I produced a litany of them, and the fact is that trying to twist what words like "laid out" meant just doesn't wash. "

Mike,

I am with you on the parsed meaning of "Layout." To me, that is the weakest part of DM's argument, and hence, why the other side if probably picking on it.

I hate to say it, but if Alan Wilson is repeating what others said, that might make it HEARSAY.  Whereas Whigham could, as DM points out, be a first person account, albeit a bunch later.  I know you think Alan was deeply involved and he may have been, which makes AW account first person as well. 

The point is this is kind of like a  civil suit where the preponderance of evidence will tip ever so slightly one way or the other, instead of a criminal trial where DM has to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is correct and the existing history is wrong.

While unpleasant perhaps for those who like the history of Merion the way it is, DM's research is out there now and they must defend the existing history, like it or not. OT, but if TePaul or Wayne came on here with a message from the Merion board to "cease and desist" I would comply. This thread is getting ridiculous, in small part to all of us.

However, its going now.  And, when the "lawsuit" alleges that the old history might be wrong, even if that is what they said over and over, the "defense" of "But, that's what they said over and over" isn't very convincing to an impartial jury, ah, I mean observer of golf history.

Please don't use the "that's what they always believed" defense again, at least without something to back it up other than your rationalizations, like TePaul's discovery of when Lloyd moved to Allgate, which can pinpoint the earliest he had his pajama meeting with Francis. 

I admit DM, me, Pat, whoever also have used them, so I am not criticizing.  Hey, they were entertaining the first time around for all of us!  Getting less so, I'm sure, for everyone here.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,

Once again you make up your facts based on your wishes. 

Alan Wilson was NOT a member of the Committee in charge of locating a permanent site.   

Alan Wilson was NOT a member of the Construction Committee.   

There is nothing anywhere that supports your contention that Alan Wilson was at all involved in the planning or construction of Merion East.   If he was an officer of the club at the time, I am unaware of it.   Tolhurst implies early involvement but much of what Tolhurst wrote about this period has proven to be less than accurate.

Even Alan Wilson notes that his information about his brother's involvement came from the other members of the Committee.   

So, as far as we know, ALAN WILSON WAS NOT THERE.


But even if he was there, I believe just about everything he wrote, except for the timing of the trip.  I just do not attribute to him that which he did not say.   

By the way, I saw the part you deleted where you falsely accused me of basically calling Alan Wilson a liar.   Good choice in getting rid of it, but I'd prefer if you just quit implying I am being disrespectful of these people in the first place. 

[DMoriarty]

What is wrong with following Lesley's lead on what it means for Hugh Wilson to have laid the course out?


He said the committee laid the course out on the ground.

_____________________________________

Jeff, 

If a designer creates 50 different potential routings on a paper plan without even marking the ground (say it is based on a topo, if you like)  has the designer laid out the course 50 times?   Or has the designer just  done 50 alternative or proposed layout plans?   

[Garland Bayley]

I think Cirba should invite MW and PC to play a match at Merion that we can discuss ad infinitum on here.

[Jeff_Brauer]

What is wrong with following Lesley's lead on what it means for Hugh Wilson to have laid the course out?


He said the committee laid the course out on the ground.

_____________________________________

Jeff, 

If a designer creates 50 different potential routings on a paper plan without even marking the ground (say it is based on a topo, if you like)  has the designer laid out the course 50 times?   Or has the designer just  done 50 alternative or proposed layout plans?   

Well, once of course. If we use "laying out" to describe the entire design process, then it must encompass all of the design process, including the false starts.

[Bradley Anderson]

George,

Is it possible that Whigham might have exagerated MacDonald's contribution to Merion?

Merion just doesn't fit with the rest of MacDonald's work, which is in all other cases, so consistently and uniformly characteristic.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bradley,

As I posted on one of these threads, I reread the piece. If anything, HJW downplayed the legend of CBM in that article. 

As to his AM win, he said "It wasn't that big a deal in those days for someone who learned golf in Scotland to beat the Americans"

As to architecture and fostering golf in America, he kind of said if CB hadn't done it, someone else would.

He was complimentary to be sure, but also humble in his assessments.  So why would he go against his basic tone on Merion?

I suspect that the logical reason is that either CBM did design Merion (at least in the routing phase and maybe a few holes) and he wanted the world to know that he HAD been under credited, at least in his opinion for a great course.  Maybe he was well ahead of Dave in being somewhat miffed at an apparent lack of credit for his father in law, sensing that for whatever reason, the Merion boys purposely downplayed his role.

Again, that supposition doesn't tell us exactly what CBM did do, if anything.  But, its entirely possible that Merion and CBM long had differing perceptions of how much he did.

[Mike_Cirba]

quote author=Garland Bayley link=topic=34433.msg692217#msg692217 date=1210190066]
I think Cirba should invite MW and PC to play a match at Merion that we can discuss ad infinitum on here.

Garland,

Nobody is forcing you to read this stuff.

You can always go over to one of the other threads....I think there's a good one going now on golf socks, or you could join the discussion on what time of day you like to play.     

[George_Bahto]

Well, I did find another Charles Blair Macdonald mention of the Merion Cricket Club. It was in his and Whigham’s fine article describing a Redan that was written in 1917 and published as a series of hole descriptions for Golf Illustrated.

For what it may be worth (and I have no idea what this means):


*

Redan Hole at the National Golf Links

By  C. B. MACDONALD and H. J. WHIGHAM
(Golf Illustrated - July 1914)

..........  after describing the basics of the Redan for three paragraphs they follow with the final paragraph:

"There are several Redans to be found nowadays on American courses. There is a simplified Redan at Piping Rock, a reversed Redan at Merion Cricket Club (the green being approached from the left hand end of the tableland) and another reversed Redan at Sleepy Hollow where the tee instead of being about level with the green is much higher. A beautiful short hole with the Redan principle will be found on the new Philadelphia course at Pine Valley. Here also the tee is higher than the hole, so that the player overlooks the tableland. The principle can be used with an infinite number of variations on any course.  In reality there are only about four or five kinds of good golf holes in golf.  The local scenery supplies the variety. Here is one of the four or five perfect kinds.  The principle of the Redan cannot be improved upon for a hole of 180 yards."

gb

[Jim Nugent]

Of course, that doesn't explain why Whigham went against his opinion and claimed that CBM did design MCC upon his death in 1939.

I am just reaching a bit to figure out how one entity could see things one way, and another a completely different way. Of cousre, if you have been through a divorce, you know such things can happen!

Whigham exaggerates at least once in his eulogy.  He calls Yale a Macdonald-Raynor course.  According to Ran's profile, that is not accurate.  Ran says,

"And as George Bahto, the leading Macdonald/Raynor historian, points out, it is Raynor and not Macdonald that deserves the credit for Yale. Bahto found an article from Charles 'Steam Shovel' Banks, who worked on the Yale construction team. The article appeared in an Alumnae Bulletin in 1929 and in it, Banks writes, Raynor deserves credit for 'what is today considered by many to be the outstanding inland golf course of America.' Banks went on, 'Mr. Macdonald, who served on the advisory committee, was familiar with the plans from the outset, but Mr. Raynor was the real genius of this masterpiece, who made the layout, designed the greens, and gave the work of construction his supervision from start to finish.'"

Actually, that sounds a lot like what Merion says CBM did at MCC.  He was familiar with Merion's plans from the outset, played an advisory role, but someone else (Wilson) made the layout and built the course. 

If Whigham was wrong about Yale, perhaps he was wrong about Merion, too.   And as others have pointed out, he isn't only calling Merion a CBM course.  He's calling it a CBM-SR course.  As I understand it, there is zero reference to or record of Raynor ever doing a thing at Merion.  Yet Whigham, in this eulogy, gives SR half credit for Merion's design. 

Another possibility:  Whigham may simply have been wrong about CBM and Merion.  I have seen this many times.  People (incorrectly) give themselves and their friends/associates/relatives credit for things they never did. 

This does not require anyone to lie: they often believe they are right.  Especially if the people involved have or had some association with the project in question.  Brilliant people can be as guilty of this as anyone else. 

Also, memories 30 years later often get distorted and exaggerated.  When Whigham wrote CBM's eulogy, he was in his late 60's or early 70's. 

Interesting side note: Whigham won his 2nd U.S. Amateur in 1897 at the Chicago Golf Club.  In the final, he shot 87 for the 1st 18 holes, and led 7 up.  His opponent shot 97.  Whigham shot 44 in the first nine of the 2nd round, and picked up another hole: his opponent shot 46.  You can see the scorecards at:  http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9F01E5DD1039E433A2575AC1A96F9C94669ED7CF

Maybe I'm missing something.  Seems like these guys were far from scratch golfers. 

I'm curious, what did CBM shoot back in those days?  Mid-80's, like his pal Whigham?  e.g., did he play in the 1897 Amateur at Chicago Golf Club, a course he designed? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Well, I did find another Charles Blair Macdonald mention of the Merion Cricket Club. It was in his and Whigham’s fine article describing a Redan that was written in 1917 and published as a series of hole descriptions for Golf Illustrated.

For what it may be worth (and I have no idea what this means):


*

Redan Hole at the National Golf Links

By  C. B. MACDONALD and H. J. WHIGHAM
(Golf Illustrated - July 1914)

..........  after describing the basics of the Redan for three paragraphs they follow with the final paragraph:

"There are several Redans to be found nowadays on American courses.

There is a simplified Redan at Piping Rock, a reversed Redan at Merion Cricket Club[/color] (the green being approached from the left hand end of the tableland)

Wayno,

Yesterday and this morning you claimed that # 3 at Merion wasn't a Redan.

I know that you told me, repeatedly, that I was wrong to call # 3 a Redan.

Do you still claim that the 3rd at Merion isn't/wasn't a "REDAN.

Was MacDonald in 1917 out of touch with GCA ?
Did he know a REDAN from a Red Herring ?[/color]

and another reversed Redan at Sleepy Hollow where the tee instead of being about level with the green is much higher. A beautiful short hole with the Redan principle will be found on the new Philadelphia course at Pine Valley. Here also the tee is higher than the hole, so that the player overlooks the tableland. The principle can be used with an infinite number of variations on any course.  In reality there are only about four or five kinds of good golf holes in golf.  The local scenery supplies the variety. Here is one of the four or five perfect kinds.  The principle of the Redan cannot be improved upon for a hole of 180 yards."

[Patrick_Mucci]

George,

Is it possible that Whigham might have exagerated MacDonald's contribution to Merion?

Merion just doesn't fit with the rest of MacDonald's work, which is in all other cases, so consistently and uniformly characteristic.

Bradley,  AND ONLY BRADLEY !

Do you find The Creek and Yale to be consistent and uniformly characteristic ?[/color]

[Jim Nugent]

George,

Is it possible that Whigham might have exagerated MacDonald's contribution to Merion?

Merion just doesn't fit with the rest of MacDonald's work, which is in all other cases, so consistently and uniformly characteristic.

Bradley,  AND ONLY BRADLEY !

Do you find The Creek and Yale to be consistent and uniformly characteristic ?[/color]

Ran and Charles Banks both say Yale is not a Macdonald course. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Nugent,

Ran doesn't say that, he quotes Banks as having said it in the Alumnae Bulletin in 1929.

You should also know that Banks worked for Raynor from 1921 to 1926, when Raynor died, and that Banks continued the practice on his own subsequent to Raynor's death.

Since you've chosen to answer for Bradely, let's rephrase and have you answer the question, how is Piping Rock consistent and uniformly characteristic of NGLA ?

No need to read the "Courses by Country" section, just answer the question in YOUR own words.

Bradley, please let Jim speak for himself, something he denied you.

Thanks

[Mike_Cirba]

C'mon Patrick...this thing is confusing and complex enough without your constant challenging of things that are known, accepted, and generally true.

Do you have either of Daniel Wexler's books?

I absolutely GUARANTEE you that you could send me just the course maps, without anything in the way of course descriptions, and just from the aerial view I could pick out every single Macdonald Raynor and/or Banks course, simply by looking at the par threes.

If I needed any confirmation beyond that, I'd go to the par fives.   The par fours would be simply icing on the cake.

I love their style, and panache, and bold contours, for both historic as well as playability reasons, but don't try to tell us that their courses aren't instantly recognizable and remarkably similar despite differences in terrain, because that's a complete red herring.

In fact, actually one of the joys of playing different courses of theirs is to see the same hole concepts employed on vastly different terrain and settings, and how those differences change the challenges and interest of the basic concepts by degrees, for better and for worse.

I would also say truthfully that at least a good portion of our fascination and interest in these holes is simply because we understand and admire them from a historical perspective.

If a modern architect tried the same approach, the bottom line is that we would call them a hack, and we'd be correct.

However, at the time they were built, the MacRaynor courses provided a really clear example of some of the principles of the state of the art at the time, and gave others who took a more original, individualistic approach something to shoot for with their own varied efforts.

[Jim Nugent]

Patrick, here is what Ran says:

"And as George Bahto, the leading Macdonald/Raynor historian, points out, it is Raynor and not Macdonald that deserves the credit for Yale."

i.e. Ran positively says Raynor not Macdonald deserves credit for Yale.  He does NOT merely quote Banks.  

I am not denying Bradley anything.  He is free to answer your question, even if it contains mistaken information.   You, however, did try to deny everyone else from responding to your question.  

[Jim Nugent]

Two more questions:

1.  Did CBM design any courses on the west coast? 

2.  By 1939 were there hundreds of courses (other than CBM-Raynor), that had Edens, Redans and Alps holes?

Whigham made both these claims in his eulogy.  Are they true? 

[DMoriarty]

Whigham exaggerates at least once in his eulogy.  He calls Yale a Macdonald-Raynor course.  According to Ran's profile, that is not accurate. 

Jim, I think you may be taking the quote from Whigham's tribute out of context.  In context it is consistent with Bank's recollection.

After discussing the creation and miraculous of NGLA on American golf, Whigham wrote:

"Clubs all over the country asked Macdonald to remodel their courses.  Since he was every inch an amateur, golf architecture was for him entirely a labor of love and it was quite impossible for him to do all that was asked of him.   So he used to send Seth Raynor to do the groundwork, and he himself corrected the plans.

Raynor had an extraordinary career as a golf architect.   He was a surveyor . . . knew nothing [at first] . . . had a marvelous eye for a country.  Having helped lay out the eighteen holes on the National, he was able to adapt them to almost any topography.   The Macdonald-Raynor courses became famous all over America.  Among the most famous are Piping Rock, the Merion Cricket Club at Philadelphia, the Country Club of Saint Louis, two beautiful courses at White Sulpher, the Lido, . . . and that equally amazing Yale course . . . "
(From Bahto's Evangelist)

Whigham was not crediting Macdonald for doing Raynor's work.  He wrote much the same thing as Banks, only more generally.    Macdonald sent Raynor to do the groundwork, and Macdonald critiqued the plans. 

Also, I think it is a mistake to interpret Whigham as having claimed that these courses were done by Macdonald and Raynor together.   In context Whigham was referring to courses by Macdonald and/or by Raynor who was closely following Macdonald's teachings and advice.   

Macdonald was great.  Raynor was too.  These are some of their great courses:

George Bahto gives us an example of a similar usage on page 233 of Evangelist, again about Yale:  "The final result was a landmark achievement of the Macdonald/Raynor design school  . . . "

If Whigham was wrong about Yale, perhaps he was wrong about Merion, too.   And as others have pointed out, he isn't only calling Merion a CBM course.  He's calling it a CBM-SR course.  As I understand it, there is zero reference to or record of Raynor ever doing a thing at Merion.  Yet Whigham, in this eulogy, gives SR half credit for Merion's design. 

In context, this is just not the case, at least as I read it.   He wasn't listing out their accomplishments -- these were Macdonald's, these were Raynor's, these were by both.  Rather he was listing a some of the great courses that either of them had designed, not necessarily courses that both of them had designed.

Maybe you have to read the  entire article to see it, or maybe you have to give it a reading that makes sense in the context, but he is writing about an evolution of this Macdonald's teachings and ideas, and not really distinguishing between each of their courses.

Another possibility:  Whigham may simply have been wrong about CBM and Merion.  I have seen this many times.  People (incorrectly) give themselves and their friends/associates/relatives credit for things they never did. 
. . .
Also, memories 30 years later often get distorted and exaggerated.  When Whigham wrote CBM's eulogy, he was in his late 60's or early 70's. 

Whigham was a life long reporter, an editor of major magazines, a war-correspondent and expert on foreign relations.   He knew the difference between fact and fiction, and was capable of presenting them on paper.    To simply assume he cannot remember of exaggerated with no reason to so believe is not at all giving him the respect his word deserves.  He even lists the course in their chronological order, based on when either MorR got involved.

If this was just an out of the blue pronouncement with no supporting facts, or even if the information that Whigham was providing was at all second hand, the I would more understand the hesitance to accept Whigham's word.  But we now know that Macdonald was much more involved at Merion than was previously believed.   He was involved in choosing the land, he prepared Wilson and the committee to lay out and build the holes, and he even returned to the property again before construction began. 

Whigham was  there with Macdonald every step of the way, at the site in 1910, at NGLA for three days with the committee in early 1911, back on Merion's site in April 1911 before construction began.  He knew what Macdonald had contributed. 

[DMoriarty]

I absolutely GUARANTEE you that you could send me just the course maps, without anything in the way of course descriptions, and just from the aerial view I could pick out every single Macdonald Raynor and/or Banks course, simply by looking at the par threes.

Really?  Just by the aerial?  What if the aesthetic style was different? Describe for me exactly what you would expect to see IN AN AERIAL in these par threes, excluding aesthetics.  I'll bet you cant tell me how long you would expect them to be.  I'll bet you cannot tell me the shapes, sizes, or angle of the greens.  Remember all you have is an AERIAL.    What about placement of hazards.  Never mind what they would look like, can you tell me where the hazards would be, without reference to style?   I'll bet you cannot do it without looking it up.  I'll trust you not to.  So tell me what you think you would see?  .  I want to hear if you could identify them without.  Don't look it up, just tell me what you think you would see.   

If a modern architect tried the same approach, the bottom line is that we would call them a hack, and we'd be correct.

Really? A hack?  We will soon see. 

[Mike Sweeney]

Patrick, here is what Ran says:

"And as George Bahto, the leading Macdonald/Raynor historian, points out, it is Raynor and not Macdonald that deserves the credit for Yale."

i.e. Ran positively says Raynor not Macdonald deserves credit for Yale.  He does NOT merely quote Banks.  

I am not denying Bradley anything.  He is free to answer your question, even if it contains mistaken information.   You, however, did try to deny everyone else from responding to your question.  

From: http://research.yale.edu/wwkelly/Yale-golf/Topics/ArchitectPages/Macdonald.html


By the anniversary of Adee’s letter, his good friend Charles Macdonald [age 68], who had “renounced having anything to do with building another golf course” [7], had agreed to serve as a consultant, and Seth Raynor had been hired as the architect. A 36-hole plan was drawn, financing for Course No. 1 was arranged, and the Athletic Board of Control authorized the execution of contracts, so that construction could begin.

Macdonald wrote that “the building of it was a difficult engineering problem.”

The land was high, heavily wooded, hilly and no part of it had been cultivated for over forty years. There were no roads or houses upon it. It was a veritable wilderness when given to Yale….When in the timber one could not see fifty feet ahead, the underbrush was so thick. However, we found on the high land wonderful deposits of sea sand, indicating that the sea must have swept the land during the glacial period. In a bog some quarter of a mile long we found deposited some four to six feet of wonderful rich black muck. These two deposits of sand and muck made it possible to build the course. [7]

There is no evidence that C B Macdonald visited the construction site or saw the course after it opened on April 15, 1926. That was the work of Seth Raynor, Charles Banks, Ralph Barton, and Bill Perkins. Macdonald was involved in the design and construction of 15 golf courses from 1893 to 1926. He accepted no fee for any of this work. Significantly, when he wrote his autobiography he chose to write about only four courses, National, Lido, Mid-Ocean and Yale. [1]

[wsmorrison]

William Ellis wrote in the November 1925 edition of Golf Illustrated,

The development of the "Ray Tompkins Memorial" was assigned to the Board of Control of the Yale Athletic Association, and the first important step was the construction of a University golf course.  Charles MacDonald was chosen as the architect, and the supervision of the construction was put into the hands of Mr. Seth J. Raynor.  The entire tract was at their disposal.  The fact that there was such and unusually wide latitude with which to work, has made the Yale golf course one of the most unique in the country.  Many clubs have only a given acreage for a course layout, necessitating similarity and limitation in many respects.  Two foreign courses are widely reputed for their bold variation of contour; the Mid-Ocean at Bermuda, and the Gleneagles in Scotland.  The Yale course, in its general characteristics, is a close parallel to these courses, and among American courses it is one of the most outstanding.

After thoroughly studying the big tract Mr. MacDonald selected whatever was best adapted to his purpose, and work began in January 1924.[/i]   

[paul cowley]

After following most of these threads I am beginning t accept that most of the facts are valid and that most likely Merion was a course designed by committee....a group of individuals that had their hands in the process to varying degrees, from the conceptual to the actual construction design of the course....and there was never a clearly dominant individual that the course  credit could be given to.

Most likely this is why none of the individuals stood up and asked for it....and instead choose to be recognised for their individual contributions.

This makes sense to me given the nature and personalities of those involved...some weaker and some stronger.

You can allow yourself to take or be given credit for a portion of something, without having to praise the others that might have been involved.

[Jim Nugent]

Wayne, Yale's Golf Committee disagreed that CBM was the architect.  The Committee, which included the President of the USGA and two U.S. Amateur champions, was in charge of laying out and building Yale's course.  It said that while CBM gave advice and counsel about the design, Seth Raynor was the architect and builder.  

The Committee said Raynor spent the summer of 1923 surveying and studying the entire 700 acres he had to work with.  By the fall of 1923, he completed his design, including cost estimates.  Yale's Board of Control approved the plans.  Raynor was hired to supervise the building "at his usual fee of $7500."  

Raynor then built the course in a little under two years, according to the Committee's report.  

The Committee gives CBM praise for his help.  It names SR as architect, builder, the person who routed the course and supervised its construction.  

btw, in the committee's report, 12 of the 18 holes are listed as templates.  Only numbers 2, 6, 7, 14, 16 and 18 are described as "natural" or partly natural holes.  


  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()