Robert White

[Peter Pallotta]

David - that's a nice looking bunker. alright. And yes, it was a random selection, fwiw. I typed in NGLA and then 1909, 1910 and 1911 in succession and picked the first article from each year that seemed to mention an opening date. It genuinely does seem to me (I'd read many of those articles before) that they were still having problems there, agronomically and completion wise -- but I won't speculate to what extent.

Peter 

[TEPaul]

"What about in situations where the pro was in the employ of the club, like Campbell at the Country Club then at Myopia?"


Are you two going to just continue to say that endlessly or is either of you EVER going to offer some evidence of Campbell and Myopia?  The club itself says they don't know anything about it and apparently never have and it sure isn't as if they don't know a ton of detail about their history. Why in the world is anyone going to take the word of two guys who've never even been there? At least produce the Boston Globe article or whatever it is that says something to that effect even if it's likely wrong and at least let the club evaluate it and consider it. What kind of game playing is all this anyway?    

[TEPaul]

"This was written by Charles Blair McDonald and is dated January 4th, 1912. I am assuming that he is a credible enough witness for all when it comes to NGLA. "The Links were formally opened on Saturday, September 16th, 1911."



Mr. Phil, Sir;

When something proves either of those two wrong they don't seem to be willing to believe anyone. Why would they believe C.B. Macdonald when he said NGLA opened in Sept. 1911? What the hell did he know? I expect them to claim he must have been seriously flawed too about when it opened. We're dealing with a couple of real "expert" researchers here so C.B. must be wrong too. 

[Thomas MacWood]

David
re: NGLA's formal opening (with a clubhouse) and golf being played there before that opening. Just some snippets from Golf Illustrated, from April 1909, March 1910, and June 1910:

April 1909
"The new course of the National Golf Links of America at Shinnecock Hills will be opened for informal play in June next [I assume they mean June 1909.]  The formal opening will not take place until the season of 1910. Work has been progressing very satisfactorily and the course, even now, is in very good shape."

March 1910
"Immediately alongside [i.e. Shinnecock] is the new course of the National Golf Links of America, now nearing completion, with rare natural advantages in soil and contour of surface. Here no money or pains have been spared to make each and every hole the most perfect of its kind, and so far the results justify the belief that the course as a whole will easily be the best in this country, if not in the world . . .which we are quite aware is saying a great deal."

June 1910
"The new course of the National Golf Links of America, near Shinnecock Hills, will not be formally opened until June, 1911."

I chose these basically at random, but it doesn't sound like they were just waiting for a clubhouse to open. In April 1909 work was progressing; in  March 1910 the course was still nearing completion, and the June 1910 announcement that the course opening would be delayed by a year (which annoucement I've copied exactly as it appeared, no shorter or longer) seems significant for its brevity.

Not sure what any of this adds up to, but I think it might put the August 1910 quote you use about the greens being "a little on the rough side" in a bit better perspective.

It doesn't seem surprising that this August 1910 article might be downplaying the agronomy issues given that in March the same magazine was already proclaiming the course the greatest in the world (!!!)

Peter
 

Peter
What is your point?

The April 1909 artilce in AG says the course will informally open in June. Travis wrote in May 1909 the course is nearing completion. Whigham wrote an extensive article in May 1909 Scribners Magazine that the course would be ready in July. In January 1910 Harpers, another extensive article/photo essay on the NGLA, showing golfers playing over the course. Obviously they were playing on the course in 1909.

They began playing at PVGC in 1914 and the course was not formally opened until 1921. Are you trying to make that the NGLA and PV were not well-known, respected and recongized until their formal opening?

I don't understand the big deal being made here.

[TEPaul]

"Colt seems to be the architect who put the gentleman/amateur architect out of business. I wonder if that was because he had attained to the level of gentleman somehow?"

Mr. Anderson:

I believe the thing that put the "amateur/sportsman" designer out of business (even though that's not the right term) is the fact that the time came (maybe around WW1) when people like those just felt they didn't need to do what those famous "amateur/sportsmen" architects had done before.

That obviously begs the question of why they did it the way they did previously. Macdonald himself explained that well when he said before NGLA, other than Myopia, GCGC and Chicago Golf Club, there just wasn't anything much good in America before NGLA (that's basically WHY he decided to do NGLA in the first place---eg as an example of what real quality in America was all about).

Matter of fact, Macdonald was basically condemning all the collected efforts of those peripatetic immigrant pro/greenkeeper/clubmaker/part time architects who did layouts too fast and back to their pro shops or whatever when he said what America mostly had "Makes the very soul of golf shriek."

The thing that ended that era of fascinating "amateur/sportsmen" architects who did those long term projects that made them famous is by about WW1 a professional architect contingent had developed that was finally beginning to do good work and their profession was solely dedicated to golf architecture and guys like those famous "amateur/sportsmen" realized they didn't have to fill that void anymore and so they didn't.

None of those famous "amateur/sportsmen" types got into a project like that again after that and that has to be why. Nobody put them out of business because they never were in the architecture business. None of them made a nickel from anything they did before WW1.

[Thomas MacWood]

"What about in situations where the pro was in the employ of the club, like Campbell at the Country Club then at Myopia?"


Are you two going to just continue to say that endlessly or is either of you EVER going to offer some evidence of Campbell and Myopia?  The club itself says they don't know anything about it and apparently never have and it sure isn't as if they don't know a ton of detail about their history. Why in the world is anyone going to take the word of two guys who've never even been there? At least produce the Boston Globe article or whatever it is that says something to that effect even if it's likely wrong and at least let the club evaluate it and consider it. What kind of game playing is all this anyway?    

TE
You want proof? You've been feeding us a steady diet of conjecture, speculation and myth for years on this site, and now you want me to provide proof. Over the years I've provided more direct evidence and information than just about anyone on this site, and you, you've provided nothing. Nice try.

[Sean_A]

"Colt seems to be the architect who put the gentleman/amateur architect out of business. I wonder if that was because he had attained to the level of gentleman somehow?"

Mr. Anderson:

I believe the thing that put the "amateur/sportsman" designer out of business (even though that's not the right term) is the fact that the time came (maybe around WW1) when people like those just felt they didn't need to do what those famous "amateur/sportsmen" architects had done before.

That obviously begs the question of why they did it the way they did previously. Macdonald himself explained that well when he said before NGLA, other than Myopia, GCGC and Chicago Golf Club, there just wasn't anything much good in America before NGLA (that's basically WHY he decided to do NGLA in the first place---eg as an example of what real quality in America was all about).

Matter of fact, Macdonald was basically condemning all the collected efforts of those peripatetic immigrant pro/greenkeeper/clubmaker/part time architects who did layouts too fast and back to their pro shops or whatever when he said what America mostly had "Makes the very soul of golf shriek."

The thing that ended that era of fascinating "amateur/sportsmen" architects who did those long term projects that made them famous is by about WW1 a professional architect contingent had developed that was finally beginning to do good work and their profession was solely dedicated to golf architecture and guys like those famous "amateur/sportsmen" realized they didn't have to fill that void anymore and so they didn't.

None of those famous "amateur/sportsmen" types got into a project like that again after that and that has to be why. Nobody put them out of business because they never were in the architecture business. None of them made a nickel from anything they did before WW1.

I don't know what anybody's definition of what a gentleman is, but if a station in life is part of the definition, Colt fit the bill.  He went to Cambridge and was a partner in a law firm.  While not upper crust this certainly placed Colt as solidly middle class which in those days meant you were essentially well to do.  I believe Colt brought gentleman ideas to the profession rather than the profession creating a gentleman out him.  In fact, it could be said that all the Colt associates were of the gentleman persuasion.

Ciao

[TEPaul]

"They began playing at PVGC in 1914 and the course was not formally opened until 1921. Are you trying to make that the NGLA and PV were not well-known, respected and recongized until their formal opening?

I don't understand the big deal being made here."

Mr. MacWood:

Allow me to ask you something? How in the world do you expect to understand much of anything about these threads if you don't read them or don't understand what you read?

The big deal made here was your protege asked when NGLA opened for play and when a few of us told him it opened for play in Sept 1911, he proceeded to basically get hysterical again asking some of us to prove that etc, etc. or not claim it. How can you have missed that, as it went on for about a page?

Mr. Phil finally produced Macdonald's own words on when NGLA opened for play but who knows maybe your research protege will claim, like you do constantly, that all these clubs records and information is seriously flawed and Macdonald didn't even know what he was talking about as to when NGLA opened for play.

This didn't have anything to do with whether it was well known or not before it opened for play. Nobody ever said that exactly even if your protege constantly claims we all did.

You two are quite a pair, that's for sure. Your continuous technique is to make some statement of opinion and act like it's fact, refuse to support it with anything because that might help someone on here, and then when you're asked to substantiate it, just divert that by creating another irrelevent list, and then when someone brings you back to the point, you claim you don't understand what they are talking about.

This goes on thread after thread and course after course. What's up with you, Mr. MacWood?

[TEPaul]

"TE
You want proof? You've been feeding us a steady diet of conjecture, speculation and myth for years on this site, and now you want me to provide proof. Over the years I've provided more direct evidence and information than just about anyone on this site, and you, you've provided nothing. Nice try."


In the case of Myopia I've provided quotations that come right from the club's contemporaneous records and you've provide zip, zero, except it's your opinion that Campbell designed the first nine hole of Myopia because of some article you won't produce.

I've provided the evidence right from the club. That is definitely not trumped because you claim it's seriously flawed. You've never seen any of it other what I put on here. You've never even been there. Again, you'll never really know much about the architectural history of any course just sitting out there in Ohio picking through Hurzden's library or perusing old newspaper articles that are obviously wrong.

[Thomas MacWood]

"TE
You want proof? You've been feeding us a steady diet of conjecture, speculation and myth for years on this site, and now you want me to provide proof. Over the years I've provided more direct evidence and information than just about anyone on this site, and you, you've provided nothing. Nice try."


In the case of Myopia I've provided quotations that come right from the club's contemporaneous records and you've provide zip, zero, except it's your opinion that Campbell designed the first nine hole of Myopia because of some article you won't produce.

I've provided the evidence right from the club. That is definitely not trumped because you claim it's seriously flawed. You've never seen any of it other what I put on here. You've never even been there. Again, you'll never really know much about the architectural history of any course just sitting out there in Ohio picking through Hurzden's library or perusing old newspaper articles that are obviously wrong.

TE
Thank you so much for the eroneous quotations. Yes, obviously the book is seriously flawed. This thread alone has shown the flaws regarding the employment records. The book had no idea when precisely White was employed and no idea that Campbell was employed at all. Yikes!

I'm sorry about the proof thing, but you may have heard I made a pledge never to help you or anyone associated with you. Hopefully you understand. Look at the bright side, you can continue to speculate wildly. 

[Thomas MacWood]

"They began playing at PVGC in 1914 and the course was not formally opened until 1921. Are you trying to make that the NGLA and PV were not well-known, respected and recongized until their formal opening?

I don't understand the big deal being made here."

Mr. MacWood:

Allow me to ask you something? How in the world do you expect to understand much of anything about these threads if you don't read them or don't understand what you read?

The big deal made here was your protege asked when NGLA opened for play and when a few of us told him it opened for play in Sept 1911, he proceeded to basically get hysterical again asking some of us to prove that etc, etc. or not claim it. How can you have missed that, as it went on for about a page?

Mr. Phil finally produced Macdonald's own words on when NGLA opened for play but who knows maybe your research protege will claim, like you do constantly, that all these clubs records and information is seriously flawed and Macdonald didn't even know what he was talking about as to when NGLA opened for play.

This didn't have anything to do with whether it was well known or not before it opened for play. Nobody ever said that exactly even if your protege constantly claims we all did.

You two are quite a pair, that's for sure. Your continuous technique is to make some statement of opinion and act like it's fact, refuse to support it with anything because that might help someone on here, and then when you're asked to substantiate it, just divert that by creating another irrelevent list, and then when someone brings you back to the point, you claim you don't understand what they are talking about.

This goes on thread after thread and course after course. What's up with you, Mr. MacWood?

TE
I'm affraid you are the one who is confused. Let me explain the stupidity of this dispute to you. This goes back to Mike's attempt to show that Macdonald wasn't all that qualified in 1910. I take it you understand the significance of 1910. He and others trying to defend the Wilson myth emphasized the course was not open for play until 1911, therefore Macdonald's credential were not all that empressive in 1910.

So when I suggested the NGLA was one of the best courses of the 1900s on this thread, who other but Mike piped up, asking what proof do you have the course was played over in the 1900s. Ultimately the point is the course was very well known in 1909, not only in American but also in the UK....and they were playing on the golf course in 1909. End of story.

[Mike_Cirba]

Fellows,

I'm not going to stoop to insults.   Fire away if you want but I'd prefer to keep this to facts and educated opinions.

Who was playing the course in 1909??   Macdonald?  Emmett??  A friend or two?    There certainly wasn't anything in the way of formalized or membership  or regular play.

What month in 1910 did Darwin write his account?   Was it around the same time Travis did for American Golfer that I linked to above, in the fall after the first Invitational tournament?   Or perhaps he was given a sneak peak on an earlier visit?

If NGLA was so renowned and widely known throughout the land prior to 1910, then why were the two most powerful and prominent golfwriters of the time, Bernard Darwin and Walter Travis only writing about it in detail for the first time in 1910?

As far as my sources, I'm quoting from contemporaneous accounts and directly from George Bahto.

George writes, page 68 of "The Evangelist of Golf";

"On July 2, 1910, (ironically, the day after Merion's site committee sent their report containing Macdonald's agronomic recommendations - comment mine) 14 months before the official opening, the course was finally ready for it's test run.   An informal Invitational Tournament was held for a select group of founders and friends invited to participate."

"A qualifying round was played on the first day, followed by two days of match play.   The course was still rough with temporary tee boxes and a few bare spots on fairways and greens.   Macdonald was still altering and refining the course.   in fact, a new 9th green was already under construction before the course ever opened."....

"It was noted that the tournament served the purpose of revealing any design shortcoming that needed correcting.  All holes received high praise, except the road hole, "which did not play as anticipated".   


Because of CB's prominence in the game as a champion competitor and fervent administrator, as well as his vociferous personality and boisterous style, everyone knew that Macdonald was trying to build the ideal links and yes, it did have lots of buzz, excitement, and some admirers among the cognescenti before it opened, but to make the case the Macdonald was widely known as a great architect prior to 1910 is hyperbolic.   He was an amateur sportsman, with a passion for building a great course, and he had gone overseas to study great courses and holes with the idea of emulating them here. 

Others soon followed his lead.

Arguably, Macdonald's greatest contribution was that he proved what a committed, passionate, well-funded neophyte could build given time, willingness to learn, trial-and-error, and dogged sticktoitivness.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Macwood,

There is no doubt that there was selective play on NGLA prior to it's being opened for "general play."

David, though, confused a few test rounds with the course being open for general play and then made the claim that George Bahto said that very thing. Unfortunately he misquoted George in support of his own incorrect conclusion. That is why it needed correcting and that C.B. Macdonald's own words can be used to set the record straight makes it irrefutable.

David quoted, "Tom Paul" when he stated that "The course opened for general play Sept. 1911." He then quoted George - "Bahto wrote: "Soon after the official opening of the course for play, the old hotel burned to the ground."   

David then concluded, "The hotel fire was in 1909, was it not? The blow out occurred 1907-1908.  The course opened for general play in 1909, at least briefly before the fire. According to Bahto..."

The statement that "the course opened for general play in 1909" is incorrect as witnessed by C.B. and it needed correcting.

No big deal to me, just a correction... Something that happens to every researcher, historian, writer and person at some time or another...

[Mike_Cirba]

I should also mention that Macdonald certainly deserves credit for perhaps the first really successful model of architectural collaboration in this country.

He showed that by seeking the opinions of other knowledgeable golfers like Dev Emmett (whose contribution to NGLA is really undervalued in my opinion...perhaps Tom Mac could write about that someday?), Walter Travis, and a number of other close golf friends, and then being willing to combine their advice with his own dreams and goals and knowledge, a more refined result was possible.

Again..others soon followed that lead.

[TEPaul]

"End of story."

Mr. Macwood:

It might be the end of your story but for about the last five years now "your stories" about a ton of things to do with golf course architecture are remarkably challengeable because they exhibit a total lack of logic and commonsense and frankly fundamental understanding of what was really going on at that time, and they usually are challenged and are generally found to be lacking. The fact that you refuse to admit any of it really doesn't matter to most.

Apparently you and your protege have concluded that in 1910 Macdonald was considered to be the best architect in America and that H.H. Barker was considered to be the second best, either amateur or professional right behind Macdonald.

Apparently you two think you can just say something like that on here and that apparently makes it a fact that is what everyone in 1910 thought. Mike Cirba simply said that probably wasn't true of Macdonald in 1910 even if a lot of people realized NGLA was going to be very good even before it opened for play in 1910.

That was basically all Mike Cirba said. Clearly Macdonald would become much more respected later. You two just basically freaked out after what Mike Cirba said and accused of lot of us of disrespecting Macdonald. Your claim that H.H. Barker was considered by American golf to be the second best architect in America in 1910 is such a joke it's not even worth responding to.

So, it's not the end of the story. Maybe it's the end of your specious story but Mike Cirba is likely right because he seems to understand what was going on in American architecture at that time a whole lot better than either of you two do.

The other laughable thing is you two even claim I'm disrespecting Macdonald in some way. I never have, I've always enjoyed and appreciated his architecture, a lot. I grew up on one of his best courses. Did you, Mr. MacWood?  

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Your post #236 is right on the money historically, in my opinion. It is beyond belief some of the things Mr. MacWood thinks he can claim and that everyone ought to believe simply because he said it. I mean here's a guy who's trying to claim that Willie Campbell was probably the greatest expert on architecture in America in the latter part of the 1900s? Jeeesus where does this guy get this junk? He called him a routing genius?? Really, why is that? What's the evidence? Apparently just his opinion, nothing more. He claims Campbell designed Myopia's original nine! The club doesn't seem to know that and never did. I wonder why that is. He claims he saw it in some old Boston Globe article but he won't show it to anyone because he says it might help me. Yeah, right. It's more like he got called out again on another of his outrageous claims and even he knows he can't support it so rather than face it he conducts another game playing charade of lists, dismissals and his final ploy-----"I don't understand the point or the question." It's complete rubbish----all of it.

This guy is beyond the pale, absolutely out to lunch. Maybe he will claim the Moon is made out of Blue Cheese next because he saw it in some child's book, and that must prove it in his opinion.

Information, solid and credible information, that's what we're looking for. I offered it as it was generated straight from the club itself and he's offered zippo and he probably never will.

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
See.

Mike
What difference does it make who was playing the golf course? Your argument regarding the official opening is bogus. Next you'll be telling us PVGC wasn't all that until 1921...check that, PV is in Philadlephia.

You've got some pretty strange ideas. Anyway you want to cut it Macdoanld was known throughout the US and the UK as someone who had given great thought to golf architecture, going back as far as 1895. That is why clubs like Merion, CC of Buffalo and others sought his advice.

You appear to be arguing those at Merion who sought his advice were idiots.

[Thomas MacWood]

Phil
I don't follow you. What is a test round? Is that what they were doing? They began playing at PV in 1914, did they have seven years of test rounds?

[Thomas MacWood]

"End of story."

Mr. Macwood:

It might be the end of your story but for about the last five years now "your stories" about a ton of things to do with golf course architecture are remarkably challengeable because they exhibit a total lack of logic and commonsense and frankly fundamental understanding of what was really going on at that time, and they usually are challenged and are generally found to be lacking. The fact that you refuse to admit any of it really doesn't matter to most.

Apparently you and your protege have concluded that in 1910 Macdonald was considered to be the best architect in America and that H.H. Barker was considered to be the second best, either amateur or professional right behind Macdonald.

Apparently you two think you can just say something like that on here and that apparently makes it a fact that is what everyone in 1910 thought. Mike Cirba simply said that probably wasn't true of Macdonald in 1910 even if a lot of people realized NGLA was going to be very good even before it opened for play in 1910.

That was basically all Mike Cirba said. Clearly Macdonald would become much more respected later. You two just basically freaked out after what Mike Cirba said and accused of lot of us of disrespecting Macdonald. Your claim that H.H. Barker was considered by American golf to be the second best architect in America in 1910 is such a joke it's not even worth responding to.

So, it's not the end of the story. Maybe it's the end of your specious story but Mike Cirba is likely right because he seems to understand what was going on in American architecture at that time a whole lot better than either of you two do.

The other laughable thing is you two even claim I'm disrespecting Macdonald in some way. I never have, I've always enjoyed and appreciated his architecture, a lot. I grew up on one of his best courses. Did you, Mr. MacWood?  

TE
Do you own a library card? If you don't I'm certain someone can help you get one. Philadelphia has an excellent library system. Once you get the card there are many newspaper archives that you'll be able to access, at that point you'll be able to look up all this wonderful information for yourself, and see how rediculous your speculation has been over the years.

[TEPaul]

"Anyway you want to cut it Macdoanld was know throughout the US and the UK as someone who had given great thought to golf architecture, going back as far as 1895. That is why clubs like Merion, CC of Buffalo and others sought his advice."

Mr. MacWood:

I doubt that. Isn't it interesting that the men responsible for the Merion East course didn't say that. Is there any chance you might begin to take what they actually said about him as proof of what they thought of him, as we do, or do you think they were seriously flawed too?

The way they referred to him and Whigam was; "those two good and kindly "amateur/sportsmen"...."

And you have such lack of understanding of that you accuse me of the "amateur/sportsmen" concept as "my schtick"?

That's what they said about him in 1910 and 1911 Mr. MacWood, not me. I guess you think those Merion people trying to design and build themselves a course in Ardmore back then were some seriously flawed schticksters, right Mr. MacWood?

[TEPaul]

"TE
Do you own a library card? If you don't I'm certain someone can help you get one. Philadelphia has an excellent library system. Once you get the card there are many newspaper archives that you'll be able to access, so you'll be able to look up all this wonderful information for yourself, and see how rediculous your speculation has been over the years."

I prefer to go direct to the source for my information. You can knock yourself out with your library card.

Listen, Mr MacWood why don't I ask Ran Morrissett if he would mind setting up a thread for you that will never leave the first page where you can tell this website on a daily basis that you're the most expert researcher on golf architecture in the world.

That's the perception you're really trying to promote and acheive on here isn't it? Isn't that why you keep telling everyone you're better than they are? Frankly, you are a good reseacher. It's just that when you find something you are a complete disaster figuring out what it actually means historically.

Knock yourself out with your library card in a library researching the history of a club you've never even been to. I'm going right to the club itself and mostly ones I've been to for years and known for years.

[wsmorrison]

If Willie Campbell was good enough that other prestigious clubs (Merion for example) were bringing him in to design their courses, would the clubs where he was employed entirely ignore his expertise?  Hard to believe.

Hey lackey of Tom MacWood, who shall remain nameless, your mentor insists that there were two Willie Campbells and the Boston Willie didn't do any work in Philadelphia.  He says the Philadelphia Willie worked on Merion and other courses around here.  I have never seen proof of MacWood's two Willies, but you better check with your peerless leader on that.

No doubt architects like Thomas and Tillinghast learned a great deal from observing the Philly scene, and they went on to have great success in California and NY respectively, but the truth is there was no Philly School. Donald Ross was the most active architect in Philly, and arguably the most popular. George Crump imported talent from the UK. Merion went to Macdonald & Whigham and Barker. Flynn was a product of Mass.

There may not have been a brick and mortar Philadelphia school of golf architecture, but there certainly was a common theory and practice among some of the Philadelphians.  You simply don't understand it.  And yes, we adopted Flynn as one of our own just as we adopted another transplanted Bostonian, Benjamin Franklin.  You may recall from the very old version of the Flynn book manuscript I sent you, that in 1887 Oliver Wendell Holmes, the renowned jurist from Boston, came to Philadelphia to give a speech.  He referred to Franklin as a true Bostonian who happened to dwell in Philadelphia on occasion.  Dr. Whitfield Bell, Jr. an executive officer of the American Philosophical Society and a Franklin scholar recalled that in response to Holmes’ claim Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, the great Philadelphia physician, arose and said to Holmes “on the contrary, Benjamin Franklin was born in Philadelphia at the age of 17.”   Well Flynn was born in Philadelphia at the age of 22.

In what way was Ross the most active architect in Philadelphia?  What time period do you wish to limit that statement to?  How many courses did Ross do around Philadelphia?  SIX, of which Gulph Mills, and Sunnybrook were significantly changed over time with Flynn redoing Sunnybrook and regrassed 17 of Gulph Mills's greens when they failed.  Of the six Ross courses, only 5 remain today.  In fact, Ross was miffed that he did not get any of the top jobs around Philadelphia despite having an office in Wynnewood, less than 10 miles from City Hall.  Ross finally got the Aronimink job and vowed to design the most difficult course in Philadelphia.  He designed a tough one, but not a great one in my mind.  Flynn got most of the commissions for design and redesign work in the area.  Flynn's local designs and redesigns total 19 and include

Merion East
Merion West
Doylestown CC
Bala GC
North Hills
Concord (FKA Brinton Lake)
McCall Field
Springhaven
Green Valley (FKA Marble Hall)
Gulph Mills (agronomy)
Manufacturers
Rolling Green
Philadelphia Country
Huntingdon Valley
Philadelphia Cricket
Sunnybrook
Cassatt private estate course
Woodcrest
Plymouth CC

I know you will not agree with me, but 5 or 6 of these courses are better than Ross's best in Philadelphia--in my opinion that is Gulph Mills over Aronimink, which has tremendous greens but falls short in many categories.  So just how was he the most active?  It would be hard to prove he was the most popular and in my mind impossible to argue that he was the best.
 

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Rather than imply that I'm either an idiot or a provincial snob, please just answer my questions.   They are really pretty straightforward.

I'll even up the ante on the whole provincial bias nonsense.

How's this?

I believe that CB Macdonald's style of putting together the creative team and the collaborative approach he employed at NGLA might have been responsible for the entire concept of the Philadelphia School of Design that soon followed!

I think CB Macdonald may have very well been the FATHER of the Philadelphia school.    I can't imagine that they weren't totally inspired by his approach and the way they acted in concert during the next few years seems totally based on the NGLA and Macdonald model.

Of course, that's not designing Merion or Pine Valley, but it's probably a much greater accomplishment (and compliment) if you think about it.

Did I mention that I've loved the Macdonald courses I've played?   NGLA is stunning and almost Heaven, and MidOcean is a great place to die happily.  Yale, although probably mostly Raynor, is grand and glorious entertainment and sporting adventure.

He just didn't design Merion, Tom and David, no matter how many times you click your heels together wishing it were so. 

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
I can appreciate your love for the amatuer/sportsman concept. I'm no psychologist (although I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night) but I reckon you wish or dream you were one of those amateur sportsmen.

Maybe you could explain what are the criteria of the amateur sportsman: Profession, education, nationality, sporting interests, other interests, religion, personality.

I have a better idea, you've been talking about the amateur sportsman for a number of years now, why don't you write an essay on the amateur sportsman? Why haven't you written an essay on the amateur sportsman? For a guy who has been so outspoken and critical of others, you sure haven't written much yourself.

[TEPaul]

"TE
Do you own a library card? If you don't I'm certain someone can help you get one. Philadelphia has an excellent library system. Once you get the card there are many newspaper archives that you'll be able to access, so you'll be able to look up all this wonderful information for yourself, and see how rediculous your speculation has been over the years."

Mr. MacWood:

I prefer to go direct to the source for my information. You can knock yourself out with your library card.

Listen, Mr MacWood why don't I ask Ran Morrissett if he would mind setting up a permanent thread for you that will never leave the first page where you can tell this website on a daily basis that you're the most expert researcher on golf architecture in the world.

That's the perception you're really trying to promote and acheive on here isn't it? Isn't that why you keep telling everyone you're better than they are? Frankly, you are a good reseacher. It's just that when you find something you are a complete disaster figuring out what it actually means historically.

Knock yourself out with your library card in a library researching the history of a club you've never even been to. I'm going right to the club itself and their records and mostly ones I've been to for years and known for years.

But I will be going to a library and a university in Boston through the good advice and help of Mr. Sears who I'm told knows more about the history of Myopia and Leeds than anyone alive. But I'm not going specifically on the architectural history of Myopia Hunt Club, I'm going on the life and times of Herbert Carey Leeds. I want to find out everything I can about the man who designed and built what I believe to be the first really good golf course and architecture in America!!