Another Merion thread

[TEPaul]

"TE
Who was George Connell? Did he work for or was he associated with Lloyd?"


Are you kidding me with that question, Tom MacWood??

I sure hope so! If you really aren't kidding I absolutely refuse to discuss with you another thing about the move of Merion from Haverford to Ardmore unless and until you spend about the next five years studying this subject first, like we have, and preferrably here in Philadelphia----the city of some kind of weird "syndrome", so be sure to pack your very best foul weather gear.

I thought David Moriarty provided you with his essay "The Missing Faces of Merion" for your review before he sent it to Ran Morrissett to post it on here. If you actually did review it I guess you didn't even understand what you read, huh?   

Are you going to ask me who Richard Francis was and what his connection to Merion or Horatio Gates Lloyd or Hugh Wilson was? How about Rodman Griscom? Or how about Alan Wilson?

[Jeff_Brauer]

That course has "Ovoidian Cancer."  Sorry, couldn't resist a poor taste play on words.   Actually, I only see Ovoids in the lowest photo.

In other photos, its clear Barker must have been part of the early century geometrical design that the GA guys tried so hard to get rid of.

I do notice a Biaritz green in that photo.  That has to be a Raynor green, or at least Barker was taking his cue for CBM in 1910. 

Note to Tom MacWood - While I don't know why TePaul needs to use this thread to rehash our "Merion problem" to the degree that he has, your questions do give him the opportunity to do so!  And, I do agree with him that if I, as a casual observer to the Merion threads, can recall the role of Connell, the absence of the Barker routing from the MCC files and other details, I believe you certainly can, given how much you seem to recall about other gca history!  Please tell me you remember the details of the "Francis land swap!"

[TEPaul]

That course has "Ovoidian Cancer."  Sorry, couldn't resist a poor taste play on words.    In any case, its clear Barker must have been part of the early century geometrical design that the GA guys tried so hard to get rid of.


JeffB, you putz, didn't you know that in 1910 H.H. Barker was considered the second best architect in America, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald??? I thought you said you read David Moriarty's essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" where the world of golf architectural history was first informed of this significant fact!

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

I am concerned that some people make statements, and at times grandiose ones at that, without giving any support whatsoever to those statements.  These positions are taken for granted by some and become accepted if not countered with evidence and not words.  It is apparent that it doesn't always work, but not to do so would enable perpetuating distorted or erroneous accounts.  

I see more and more mistakes on GCA regarding the historical record.  Perhaps it is due to agenda-driven research, but often simply restating something that becomes fact merely because it is written in a history book or accepted as oral tradition.  There are many mistakes in the thread on Merion's hole drawings.  I'm not going to get involved in anything to do with that subject, but I do hope that the readers and participants on this site remember that everything written is not correct and it is up to the individual to fact check before accepting anything as true, even if written by Moriarty or MacWood.  Lots of names, dates and words may seem compelling, but can be deceiving.   If someone really wants to learn about the history of a club, I would start with the club first and seek out a club historian if possible.  I would not take for granted things posted on GCA as undeniably true.  This is the primary reason I came back, if only temporary.

We know Barker consulted at Springhaven and his work was carried out.   I read that Barker did some work at Atlantic City CC, though I have not seen any evidence of it nor have I read anything specific as to what that work entailed.  Barker consulted with a development firm in Ardmore for a golf course on some of the land Merion East now sits on.    

Now to more important matters.  Tom Paul, my swing is a mess and my game in tatters.  I hit it onto the practice green to the right of the first tee yesterday.  I recovered pretty well for a long stretch, but I need HELP!!!!

[Jeff_Brauer]

That course has "Ovoidian Cancer."  Sorry, couldn't resist a poor taste play on words.    In any case, its clear Barker must have been part of the early century geometrical design that the GA guys tried so hard to get rid of.


JeffB, you putz, didn't you know that in 1910 H.H. Barker was considered the second best architect in America, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald??? I thought you said you read David Moriarty's essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" where the world of golf architectural history was first informed of this significant fact!

TePaul,

I did read Davids essay, and the many threads and rebuttals that followed.  Sad, but true.

As your friend (who I am told definitely DID NOT piss on any graves, speaking of inaccurate writings here) said in preface to his post, I am using the pictures he posted to make my judgement, not the written word of ANY poster.  As Groucho Marx once said, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

Barker may have been one of the top three architects of the time, but what does that mean in a field of four or so?  If he did do the work shown in the photos at Springdale, he was in fact a non artistic, geometric bunker kind of guy.  And, he must have seen the Biaritz greens of CBM, because as we all know, that was some kind of stylized version of a hole over an ocean inlet in France that really looked nothing like the original. 

So, Barker copied a copy, or at least copied an adaptation.  But, with the steep bank in front, I don't think he got that one right, because there is no way to run the ball to the front pin.

[wsmorrison]

Jeff,  

I don't think the green that looks like a Biarritz has a swale in it.  That green probably preceded Barker's work since contemporary accounts only speak about Barker adding hazards and not designing greens.  The earliest plan I've seen is 1924.  That green is on the 3rd hole and is played toward the clubhouse; so the approach angle to that green is 90* off of what a typical approach to a Biarritz, along the longest dimension.  

If that green was by Barker (1909-1910) or existed previously, it was before Macdonald or Raynor ever built a Biarritz in America, right?

[Jeff_Brauer]

What's funny about that geometric bunkering is that the middle photo clearly shows a more free form bunker, shaped around an existing tree.

I wonder what it was that made Barker (if he did those bunkers) or anyone of that era think that it was good to shape more naturally around a tree, but in absence of any topographical features, that bunkers, greens and tees should be geometric?  Couldn't they see the results of the more natural bunker shaping and apply that elsewhere?  

Were the costs of moving just a bit more earth to shape rounded features so constricting that they didn't bother?

Were they influenced by city planning who used blocks for efficiency unless the topo really dictated some other road pattern?

Did the idea of "scienfific architecture" really constrict them?

Is rounded vs rectangular just a style choice, that means geometric bunkers may come back in style in a nother 50 years or so and all will laugh at our current "feeble efforts?"

Really, I wonder why those old guys couldn't see how bad their work really was!

Wayne,

As always, I could be wrong, but as I study that photo, and the other that shows the general area from greater distance, it looks like the fw comes in from the left, no?  You are correct that the greens may have been pre-Barker. But I thought Flynn came in 1924 and redid what Barker had done earlier.  By this time, Barker was long gone, no?

[TEPaul]

"This is the primary reason I came back, if only temporary."


The PISSBOY is only coming back temporarily??   

GOLFCLUBATASERS, shout it from the mountain tops---

"SAY IT AIN'T FRICKIN' SO, PISSBOY?"

BTW, can I call you "PB" for short?

[TEPaul]

JeffB (or is it JebbF?);

Wayne's right, those greens preceded Barker at Springhaven (It's Springhaven, not Springdale. Maybe you're mixed up with my farm that's called Happydale Farm on here even if it's really Featherfield Farm).

The architect who built the original iteration of Springhaven was Ida Dixon, perhaps the first known woman architect, and from the research I've done on her she really was some kind of geometric bitch, I'll tell you.

She imported a crew of Nubian slaves to build that course and they say she worked them brutally with whips and chains and geometric racks and stuff, particularly if they ever tried to do greens and such in shapes that weren't rectilinear.

[TEPaul]

Wayno:

Your photographic inclusion this morning of the Barker bunkers at Springhaven in 1909 and the Tillie article of Jan. 1910 I believe has added some serious dimension and credence to what MCC did with Barker's plan for Merion in June 1910---eg basically did not consider it at all. I'm quite sure Wilson and Merion's golfers were familiar with what Barker had done at Springhaven the year before. Springhaven is not far away!

The fact that Barker's plan was submitted to MCC by real estate developer Connell and not solicited by MCC or Lloyd might also explain why Lloyd renegotiated the asking price for the land with Connell not long after Connell informed them he'd asked Barker to submit a plan for Merion.   

It's a little hard for me to read some of the words in these handwritten Lloyd letters but one section I think says something like: "Any man who proposes "ovoids" on a golf course should never be taken seriously and should be immediately sent back from whence he came."

I think it might have been Horatio Gates Lloyd who felt that if Long Island and GCGC was from whence Barker came it may not be far enough away from Merion. I think it was Lloyd who saw to it that H.H. Barker was sent back home abroad a few years later and conscripted into WW1. Lloyd was a most powerful man and he was apparently not into ovoid bunkers that seemingly multipled into pairs on their own.

Yep, Tom MacWood, that H.H. was quite an architect alright but it sort of looks like he had a helluva long way to go before topping something like Myopia!

[Thomas MacWood]

"TE
Have you seen the routing that was approved and compared it to the Barker routing?"

Tom:

In the future please try to read what I just wrote so I don't have to constantly repeat information I've already provided.

It appears quite clear from the MCC Search Committee report to the MCC board on July 1, 1910 that neither the committee nor the board even considered Barker's "rough layout" (that was Barker's description of what he did, by the way). The reason I say that is his "rough layout" is not part of MCC's records, but his letter mentioning that rough layout has been a part of the MCC record for close to a century.

This would lead a reasonable mind to assume that MCC never even considered Barker's rough layout or his advice. This seems to be confirmed by the fact that the same report indicates MCC did consider Macdonald's and Whigam's general advice on the Ardmore land because it is included in MCC's record and we certainly know MCC got together again with Macdonald/Whigam for app 8-9 months later for a day and a half at NGLA in the winter or early spring of 1911 and again with Macdonald/Whigam at Ardmore on April 6, 1911 during a one day visit. As far as anyone has ever been able to determine that was basically Macdonald/Whigam's last involvement with Merion (although I do have a letter from Macdonald to Wilson a year or so later, but it only talks about the preferable quanitities of fertilizer application on greens).

So, my point is it appears a Barker routing was never part of the Merion record or ever part of the design process for Merion East.

The design plan that was approved by the board has never been seen by me or anyone else I've ever heard of in modern times. Interestingly, however, it is apparently clear to see where it was actually attached to the handwritten board meeting minutes that mention it and also mention its submission to the board for approval (the meeting minutes indicate it was approved in that meeting).

In my opinion, that could probably be explained by the fact that after it was approved it was used for the next six months or more by Wilson and his committee as they constructed the golf course, and then somehow lost at some point, as, unfortunately, we know is not uncommon with some of these interesting assets.

The first actual architectural drawings available in the app twenty year creation of Merion East first appear around 1915 and on for the next 15-20 years and they are all from William Flynn. They are all part of the Merion record now (after Wayne Morrison found them all in a barn in Bucks County about 6-7 years ago).

TE
Interesting logic - Barker's routing is missing from the records, therefore we must conclude Merion did not consider it seriously or must not have used it. On the other hand you have knowledge of another routing from April 1911 which was apparenrtly attached to letter to the board, of course this one is missing too, not part of the records either. Have you ever heard the saying whats good for the goose is good for the gander? We have no idea if they are the same routing or not.

One logical explanation why these two routings are not part of the records may be due to the fact they were being used out in the field. Walking over the site referring to them, perhaps even using them as a working document, or perhaps using the  Barker routing to produce a more formal routing plan. From what I understand there were drawings/sketches of famous British holes that seem to be missing as well, same explanation there too. My guess is all these routing, plans, and sketches were all together at one time.   

You often refer to Barker's routing as a stick routing. If you've never seen it how do you know it was a stick routing?

George Connell and his brother John Connell were part of the realestate scheme, along with Lloyd. So the answer to the question is yes, G Connell was associated with Lloyd. G.Connell was also a politician, heavily involved in Republican party politics. He was a long time city councilman and eventually became the Mayor of Philadelphia. I've seen his name associated with the Cobbs Creek project too.

Those are are great photos of Springhaven. You can really see the similarities to GCGC. The use of the perpindicular trench bunker, the nutmeg grater mounding feature, the mounds on either side of the bunker protecting the front of the green, and the scarcity of cross-bunkers.

Here is a link to an article that shows early photos of Merion. You can definetely see similarities in the mounding and the geometric nature of the hazards.

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

[Jim Nugent]

Do we know for certain who "Far and Sure" is? 

[TEPaul]

"TE
Interesting logic - Barker's routing is missing from the records, therefore we must conclude Merion did not consider it seriously or must not have used it. On the other hand you have knowledge of another routing from April 1911 which was apparenrtly attached to letter to the board, of course this one is missing too, not part of the records either. Have you ever heard the saying whats good for the goose is good for the gander? We have no idea if they are the same routing or not."




WE HAVE NO IDEA IF THEY ARE THE SAME ROUTING OR NOT?? 

You're just kidding me again, right?

Who is "WE"?  Maybe it's you and David Moriarty but it isn't me or Wayne Morrison or Merion.



Honest to God, Tom MacWood, you really do know how to beat a dead horse endlessly, don't you?

That might be the case if there was absolutely nothing else in the Merion record about course designs and who did them for Merion East. But that is not the case. There is plenty in the Merion record (committee and board meeting minutes). And that is beginning over half a year AFTER Barker's letter to Connell was submitted to MCC AND a over half a year AFTER Barker's name was never mentioned again and never would be mentioned again in any single context to do with the design of Merion East.

Beginning in the winter of 1911 Wilson and his committee came up with multiple design plans for the course (hence Richard Francis' account of many hours over the drawing board and in the field). Then they visited Macdonald at NGLA, then they honed those multiple design plans down to a few, then they had Macdonald/Whigam come back to Ardmore for a single day (April 6, 1911) and look over their plans and look over the ground again. This is obviously WHY Merion's records has always included their thanks to Macdonald and Whigam for their help and advice. 

One of those plans of many plans generated by Wilson and his committee over the winter and spring of 1911 was submitted to the board in the middle of April 1911, it was approved by the board, and that was the plan that was constructed to.

I can understand that you are probably not aware of this and never have been but now that you are hopefully you will not again make statements like you just did above such as what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Why in the world would Wilson and committee have worked on design plans for the course all winter and into the spring if they were just going to construct to Barker's "rough layout" that he'd provided to Connell in June 1910??

All these men were trying to design and build themselves a new course in Ardmore and they were working very hard doing that but perhaps you actually think all these men on MCC's committees and on the board were all just lying to one another and just making up all that's recorded in MCC's board meeting minutes. Maybe you think all those recorded board and committee reports are a fairy tale and they were just faking it and constructing to Barker's "rough layout" plan to Connell of almost a year before!

Honestly, Tom MacWood, you really do need to give it up on this and just stop challenging everything endlessly, particularly when you're not even aware of over half of it.

That you actually asked me who George Connell was, at this point , should be evidence enough that there really isn't any productive reason to carry on these discussions about Merion, or Macdonald or Barker with you. It's become a real waste of time for us and I expect you too. We all have better things to do, I'm quite sure. 

We will finish our report one of these days soon and hopefully we can make it available to you. Then, HOPEFULLY, your endless questions to us and your endlessly challenges about Merion East's early architectural history will be finally answered.

[TEPaul]

"From what I understand there were drawings/sketches of famous British holes that seem to be missing as well"


I can not believe you would say that either, at this point! I guess that really does prove you have simply not been following these Merion threads or that you simply have not been able to understand much about them.

MY GOD.

Tom, we really don't have time to do this all over again just for your benefit.

Sorry about that.

[Thomas MacWood]

WE HAVE NO IDEA IF THEY ARE THE SAME ROUTING OR NOT?? 

You're just kidding me again, right?

Who is "WE"?  Maybe it's you and David Moriarty but it isn't me or Wayne Morrison or Merion.



Honest to God, Tom MacWood, you really do know how to beat a dead horse endlessly, don't you?

That might be the case if there was absolutely nothing else in the Merion record about course designs and who did them for Merion East. But that is not the case. There is plenty in the Merion record (committee and board meeting minutes). And that is beginning over half a year AFTER Barker's letter to Connell was submitted to MCC AND a over half a year AFTER Barker's name was never mentioned again and never would be mentioned again in any single context to do with the design of Merion East.

Beginning in the winter of 1911 Wilson and his committee came up with multiple design plans for the course (hence Richard Francis' account of many hours over the drawing board and in the field). Then they visited Macdonald at NGLA, then they honed those multiple design plans down to a few, then they had Macdonald/Whigam come back to Ardmore for a single day (April 6, 1911) and look over their plans and look over the ground again. This is obviously WHY Merion's records has always included their thanks to Macdonald and Whigam for their help and advice. 

One of those plans of many plans generated by Wilson and his committee over the winter and spring of 1911 was submitted to the board in the middle of April 1911, it was approved by the board, and that was the plan that was constructed to.

I can understand that you are probably not aware of this and never have been but now that you are hopefully you will not again make statements like you just did above such as what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Why in the world would Wilson and committee have worked on design plans for the course all winter and into the spring if they were just going to construct to Barker's "rough layout" that he'd provided to Connell in June 1910??

All these men were trying to design and build themselves a new course in Ardmore and they were working very hard doing that but perhaps you actually think all these men on MCC's committees and on the board were all just lying to one another and just making up all that's recorded in MCC's board meeting minutes. Maybe you think all those recorded board and committee reports are a fairly tale and they were just faking it and constructing to Barker's "rough layout" plan to Connell a year before!

Honestly, Tom MacWood, you really do need to give it up on this and just stop challenging everything endlessly, particularly when you're not even aware of over half of it.

That you actually asked me who George Connell was should be evidence enough that there really isn't any productive reason to carry on these discussion about Merion with you. It's become a real waste of time for us and I'm sure you too. We all have better things to do, I'm quite sure. 

TE
If you've never seen Barker's routing and you've never seen the April 1911 routing, you obviously have no idea if they were identical, similar or completely different. I agree with your last paragraph, this is a thread on Barker. This site has suffered enough.  I know you would like to turn this thread into another Merion thread (as you have attempted with other threads) but lets try to stay on track.

Wayne
Are you saying that Atlantic City might be the third course Baker designed/redesigned in Philadelphia?

[TEPaul]

"George Connell and his brother John Connell were part of the realestate scheme, along with Lloyd. So the answer to the question is yes, G Connell was associated with Lloyd. G.Connell was also a politician, heavily involved in Republican party politics. He was a long time city councilman and eventually became the Mayor of Philadelphia. I've seen his name associated with the Cobbs Creek project too."


Tom:

We know who Connell was. We know all about him and we know all about his career. You aren't telling us anything there we haven't known about him. We also now know all about the men involved from Merion's side, and about who they were and the details of their careers and lifes.

Connell and his independent real estate associates (whose names we have) were also the SELLERS of the land MCC bought and in that capacity Lloyd was acting for MCC as the BUYERS!! Connell and his group were not part of MCC---Lloyd was. Perhaps you are not aware of why sellers and buyers do not exactly WORK TOGETHER in a deal of this nature. Have you ever bought land Tom, or a house?

[TEPaul]

"I know you would like to turn this thread into another Merion thread (as you have attempted with other threads) but lets try to stay on track."

Tom MacWood:

I absolutely do not want to turn this into another Merion thread at all and I won't do that.

But you asked me how I know the course design for Merion East wasn't Barker's and I sure do hope I explained that to you because that is what you asked me. If you're not satisfied with the answer then so be it---hopefully you can come here yourself someday and research all this as we have if that's what it'd take to satisfy you. I do not want to continue beating this dead Merion horse of yours and hopefully you don't either, and I expect that's why you said what you did above.

[TEPaul]

"Here is a link to an article that shows early photos of Merion. You can definetely see similarities in the mounding and the geometric nature of the hazards."

We've had those photos for years. We believe those mounds are an example of a short-lived fad of this particular early time sometimes called "aplinization" (logically an offshoot of so-called "Mid Surrey" mounding).

It appeared for a short time on Merion's 9th as well as on Pine Valley's 3rd. On both courses it was rather quickly removed and never seen again.

Commonly associated with J.H. Taylor, Tillinghast in the early days, and now perhaps Barker and some others of that early era.

[wsmorrison]

Tom MacWood,

I'm only saying what I've said.  I am not trying to defend the statement in a newspaper article, I am stating what little I know about Barker's efforts in the Phila area.

[Thomas MacWood]

Beginning in the winter of 1911 Wilson and his committee came up with multiple design plans for the course (hence Richard Francis' account of many hours over the drawing board and in the field). Then they visited Macdonald at NGLA, then they honed those multiple design plans down to a few, then they had Macdonald/Whigam come back to Ardmore for a single day (April 6, 1911) and look over their plans and look over the ground again. This is obviously WHY Merion's records has always included their thanks to Macdonald and Whigam for their help and advice. 

Multiple design plans? Come on. This is obviously your over active imagination at work here. You often have difficulty differentiating between facts and things you've imagined. There is no record of Wilson working on any design plan. For all we know the routing submitted by Barker was the routing they worked with entire time.

One of those plans of many plans generated by Wilson and his committee over the winter and spring of 1911 was submitted to the board in the middle of April 1911, it was approved by the board, and that was the plan that was constructed to.

I can understand that you are probably not aware of this and never have been but now that you are hopefully you will not again make statements like you just did above such as what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Why in the world would Wilson and committee have worked on design plans for the course all winter and into the spring if they were just going to construct to Barker's "rough layout" that he'd provided to Connell in June 1910??

1) There is no record that Wilson and the committee worked on any design plans, other than to possibly tweaking the area near #16 tee. 2) Usually you have to own land before you start building on it. 3) Construction rarely begins in the winter.

All these men were trying to design and build themselves a new course in Ardmore and they were working very hard doing that but perhaps you actually think all these men on MCC's committees and on the board were all just lying to one another and just making up all that's recorded in MCC's board meeting minutes. Maybe you think all those recorded board and committee reports are a fairy tale and they were just faking it and constructing to Barker's "rough layout" plan to Connell of almost a year before!

Save the dramatics.

Honestly, Tom MacWood, you really do need to give it up on this and just stop challenging everything endlessly, particularly when you're not even aware of over half of it.

That you actually asked me who George Connell was, at this point , should be evidence enough that there really isn't any productive reason to carry on these discussions about Merion, or Macdonald or Barker with you. It's become a real waste of time for us and I expect you too. We all have better things to do, I'm quite sure. 

We will finish our report one of these days soon and hopefully we can make it available to you. Then, HOPEFULLY, your endless questions to us and your endlessly challenges about Merion East's early architectural history will be finally answered.

Sorry about the confusion over the plans and sketches of the famous holes, I had almost forgot that was part of the often told legend of the 1910 trip that I disproved. My bad.

[Thomas MacWood]

"Here is a link to an article that shows early photos of Merion. You can definetely see similarities in the mounding and the geometric nature of the hazards."

We've had those photos for years. We believe those mounds are an example of a short-lived fad of this particular early time sometimes called "aplinization" (logically an offshoot of so-called "Mid Surrey" mounding).

It appeared for a short time on Merion's 9th as well as on Pine Valley's 3rd. On both courses it was rather quickly removed and never seen again.

Commonly associated with J.H. Taylor, Tillinghast in the early days, and now perhaps Barker and some others of that early era.

TE
I know what Alpinization is/was. There is thread somewhere on the back pages where I first explained the concept to you. You had never heard of it or understood its origins.

Whatever you want to call it...there are similarities between the mounds in both photos.

[TEPaul]

"Sorry about the confusion over the plans and sketches of the famous holes, I had almost forgot that was the often told legend of the 1910 trip that I disproved. My bad."


This is precisely the kind of thing that annoys us here. How do you think you disproved that story? Do you know where that story came from? Even we aren't sure where that story of plans and drawings from abroad from Wilson came from but we do now know it's a story that probably did not come within about half a century of the creation of Merion East.

The supreme irony is it seems to be a story, the inaccuracy of which, David Moriarty, and apparently you as well, used to claim and then conclude that Wilson and his committee could not have designed Merion East and therefore did not.

That claim and that conclusion is patently inaccurate and wrong and the Merion record proves it to be.

I think an awful lot on here wonder to what lengths you will go on this website to pass yourself off as what you call this "expert researcher" but this pretty much takes the cake. You really have no shame at all, do you? I doubt you're that interested in researching architecture, it seems like it's always about just constantly challenging people like us. That's your game and it really sucks. In my opinion, it's pretty much the sole cause of the antagonism you generate and David Moriarty has taken to new heights.

I think it's indicative that we have never had this problem with anyone else on this website or anyone esle anywhere, for that matter, other than with the two of you.

[TEPaul]

"TE
I know Alpinization is/was. There is thread somewhere on the back pages where I first explained the concept to you. You had never heard of it."


Tom:

Why do you need to keep saying things like that on here to me or anyone else? It is total bullshit. I've known about alpinization long before I ever heard of you. It's prominent and famous on a course such as Somerset Hills which I played many times years before this website began. But you always seem to feel some need to say things like that to people. Is it just to try to build yourself up to try to make yourself look better on here?

How insecure are you really?

[Thomas MacWood]

What exactly is this "Mid Surrey" influence? Some call it mounds but Tillinghast as "Far and Sure" (or was that Travis) called that look he thought he saw at Merion "Mid Surrey grassy hollows". If it was hollows that either of them thought they saw in 1913 it doesn't seem to me they lasted at Merion. If they were mounds I could see it maybe a tiny bit but not really.

TE
The sketches and plans legend came from Wilson when describing his visit to the NGLA.

Now lets get back to Barker.

You and Wayne have given the impression Barker was not one of the elite architects of 1910-1911. Who were some of Barker's contemporaires during that time frame and what were their best designs?

[TEPaul]

"Whatever you want to call it...there are similarities between the mounds in both photos."


That's true. So what? Would you like to start a five year campaign next claiming that somehow proves  Albert Tillinghast  secretly designed Merion East?