[Mike_Cirba]

David,

I can't see your map right now on my Blackberry but didn't Connell and HDC offer Merion 100 acres "or whatever we need" for the golf course?

[TEPaul]

About the size of the acreaage of your red lines above (100 acres?) didn't you realize the old Johnson Farm property went right to College Avenue on the top of the "L"? Lloyd bought the whole 140 acre Johnson Farm (140) in Dec 1910 and he bought the 21 acre Dallas estate in the same deed 140+21=161 acres.

Take that north/south western line on the top of the "L" right to College Ave, and then put the green line straight from the College directly to the southwest corner of the Haverford College land in red. That was part of the dimension of the old Johnson Farm for about a hundred and fifty years. The addition of that section in red probably is around 17 acres----eg your 100 acres in red + another 17=117! Then you add to that the section of the Johnson Farm to the west that's about 23 acres and you have 140 the long time size of the Johnson Farm. Again, that was the size of it for about 150 years and it would not change until Lloyd flipped land back to MCCGA in July 1911.

[DMoriarty]

The 100 acre factoid comes from the July 1, 1910 Merion Site Committee report.  HDC had offered Merion “100 acres, or whatever would be required to lay out the Course.”

As for the Johnson farm area north of the the red area (including the green triangle) I believe they were planning on developing it, along with the other 200 acres they had secured.   Remember that according to Francis, the green triangle was not part of the land they were considering for the golf course until he figured out the swap.

I've only marked off the portion of the Johnson farm that was most likely to have been offered.   I excluded the narrow strip along the north side of Ardmore and the rectangle that sits out by itself, and the portion west of the Haverford College rectangle (per the Francis statement.)

I'm not confident in my measure at this point, but don't have the resources with me to do a more accurate one.  It looks like more than 100 acres to me, but maybe that is an illusion.

__________________________________________________

David,

A picture is worth a thousand words. That illustrates your theory and makes a little bit of sense, but for one thing - I think I could easily fit the last five holes in the land in red.  14 could parallel 1, 15 could be a long par 5 along the west border, and 16 and 17 would be a 3 and a 4 leading back to the same 18th.  Of course, I don't recall the topo that well.

Jeff, Surely one could fit 18 holes in the areas marked in red and green, but I am not sure they could fit the holes they wanted.   For one thing,  Macdonald wanted to use the area behind the clubhouse (he mentioned this in his June 1910 letter, and it is again apparently mentioned in the minutes.  For another, Francis comments that the land west of the current course was not part of any layout they were considering.   I think they had particular holes in mind but that those holes didn't quite fit the way they wanted.  For example, they may not have been as long as they wanted and those that suggested them (guess who) weren't working off of contours or topos, and probably didnt have the exact yardages.   Adding the triangle allows 14, 15 and 16 to be longer and less crowded horizontally.  

Remember, Macdonald noted  in June 1910 that the problem would be fitting a first class course on the property, and that couldn't be sure that such a course would fit without a contour map. Also, Barker's earlier June 1910 routing was preliminary.   From Macdonald's comment we know that whatever he had in mind (if anything) it would be a tight fit.  So if Francis actually sat down with a map topo or contour map and tried to fit what either Barker or Macdonald had in mind, he might not have come up with holes that did not fit as well as he had hoped.  For example, 14-16 might not have been as long as Merion wanted (or that Barker/Macdonald may have thought they were.)   Adding the land to the west of the college property could resolve this problem without totally changing the routing.  

Before anyone goes ballistic, the above is for illustrative purposes only, and is only meant to be a possible scenario, and not the only possible scenario.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Is anyone else having a problem accessing the last page on this thread?

[Mike_Cirba]

Testing, 1, 2...testing 1, 2

Man...I knew someone should have deleted this thread.   

[DMoriarty]

About the size of the acreaage of your red lines above (100 acres?) didn't you realize the old Johnson Farm property went right to College Avenue on the top of the "L"? Lloyd bought the whole 140 acre Johnson Farm (140) in Dec 1910 and he bought the 21 acre Dallas estate in the same deed 140+21=161 acres.

Tom, I have long realized the dimensions and location of the "Johnson Farm" property, including the large rectangle to the offset to the west, the one you apparently just discovered this morning.   The red area represents what I believe was offered by HDC to MCC in June 1910.  I explain this directly above.

Take that north/south western line on the top of the "L" right to College Ave, and then put the green line straight from the College directly to the southwest corner of the Haverford College land in red. That was part of the dimension of the old Johnson Farm for about a hundred and fifty years. The addition of that section in red probably is around 17 acres----eg your 100 acres in red + another 17=117! Then you add to that the section of the Johnson Farm to the west that's about 23 acres and you have 140 the long time size of the Johnson Farm. Again, that was the size of it for about 150 years and it would not change until Lloyd flipped land back to MCCGA in July 1911.

The measure above the HDC property above my line is not 17 acres.  More like around 10-12.

__________________________

My understanding is that the major purchase (by MCC) consisted of:

21 acres Dallas Estate + 96 Acres HDC land ("Johnson Farm") = 117 Acres.

The 96 Acres was not exactly out of the 100 offered, because of the Francis Swap.  This breaks down as follows:

Approx. 100 Acres offered by HDC  + Approx. 3 ^1/4 acres for the 15th green/16th tee  - Approx. 7 ^1/4 Acres given up in the swap = 96 Acres.

Add in the 21 acre dallas estate, and we have our 117.
_________________________________

Here is another rough measure of the 100 Acres that approximates what I believe was offered to MCC by HDC in July.  (My earlier one has too much room at the bottom.)   



According to Google Earth Pro, the yellow box measures 100.36 Acres.

[Dan Herrmann]

(is there any other spot on this earth that fits so much great golf into such a small space?)

[DMoriarty]

(is there any other spot on this earth that fits so much great golf into such a small space?)

Probably not.   

But think about how this could have come about.   They knew in June 1910 that they needed just under 120 yards for a golf course, the exact amount they ended up with when they finally purchased and leased the land.   How could they come up with the exact amount if they handn't even bothered to consider the lay out?

 I think they fit the course first, and then decided upon the approximate boundary, then refined the course, then they finally finalized the boundary.  So when they were done, the course fit the site like a perfectly tailored suit. They even made alterations before the purchase, incorporating around 27 acres (3- acres behind the clubhouse, 3+ acres for 15th green/16th tee, and the 21 acre Dallas Estate) that weren't even originally offered to them, and trimming off about 7+ acres of excess.

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Thanks for helping move the conversation along.

I have a number of questions, if I might.

1) Connell and HDC made clear that Merion could have as much land as they needed for their golf course.   They seemed to make that very clear when they said, "100 acres, or whatever would be required to lay out the course", which is pretty much an open-ended proposition.   Why do you think they stuck with 100 acres?   If they needed more, wouldn't it have been easier to simply negotiate for more cheap land with HDC (recall they were paying about 1/2 price for land from HDC) rather than go and buy a whole different property with the Dallas Estate?   Also in terms of topography, that land is ok, with a couple of nice features, but it's nothing great for the most part, nor does it feature anything nearly as dramatic as what they had available to them north above the quarry on the Johnson Farm.  

2) Macdonald and Whigham seemed to identify the potential of the quarry in June 1910 when they stated that "much could be made" of the natural hazard.   Why do you think they didn't recommend that Merion buy easily available land directly due north of the quarry, where the 16th tee is today, as that would have made a very obvious lengthy par four with over 250 available for the drive, and then a lengthy second.   AS it is, they only recommended the purchase of land a mere 65 yards beyond the quarry, limiting Merion to using the quarry for a single par three.   There is no way to create a horizontal hole of any length running west/east using the quarry because the quarry continues all the way to the eastern border of the property?  

Also, anyone familiar with the property knows that you couldn't run a hole of any length running south to north across the quarry because the second shot would be ridiculously blind.   The only way to utilize the quarry as a visible hazard was either 1) from north to south, such as the dramatically visual 16th, or 2) from the clifftop down into the bowels of the quarry of par three length like the 17th.   Who do you think goofed here?

3) Why would the Committee, or Macdonald, or whover, create 13 holes on the lower land when they had to know they didn't have anywhere near enough room left north of that to create five additional holes?    By your own map you tell us that they didn't want to use land west of the course (as Francis tells us it was not part of any golf layout), so after they laid out 13 holes (and already using up one of the par threes for the 13th hole)  all they had left was the area I have drawn in light purple (and the quarry, unusable for any tee, fairway, or green, is in yellow).   It's clear that there is no space there for more than 3 holes, tops, if they were of any length and quality as finishing holes of a championship course, and only one of them could be a par three.




What I find odd is that the other day when I produced the exact same map and question you basically called me out saying I was horribly misrepresenting your theory.   Yet, I don't see any difference between the area remaining for the final five holes on your map versus what I drew yesterday on Bryan's?




I'm sure I'll have more thoughts and questions, but I think that should suffice for now.

Thanks

[Mike_Cirba]

But think about how this could have come about.   They knew in June 1910 that they needed just under 120 yards for a golf course, the exact amount they ended up with when they finally purchased and leased the land.   How could they come up with the exact amount if they handn't even bothered to consider the lay out?

David,

What is the first mention of 120 acres?

We know Barker laid out a 6,000 yard course on 100 acres in June 1910, and we know that Macdonald's July 1910 letter after his June visit didn't mention anything about total acreage, correct?

What is your source for saying they knew as early as June 1910 that they needed 120 acres?

Also, it was reported in January 1911 that;

"The Merion Cricket Club has purchased for use as a golf course about 117 acres of ground between Ardmore Avenue and College Avenue, Haverford, adjoining the large tract owned by Haverford College.   The purchase was made by HG. Lloyd...on behalf of Merion Cricket Club, from the Haverford Development Company, which was represented in the transaction by Joseph R. Connell and E.W. Nicholson.   The company owns 221 acres adjoining the tract purchased by the club.   Mr. Lloyd has also obtained from the company an option on 13 acres additional, which will probably be taken up by the club.  This will give the club a new golf course of 130 acres instead of the tract of 60 acres at Rose Lane and Gulf Road, which it leases from the Pennsylvania Road as a golf course."

Where do you think those additional 13 acres optioned by Lloyd were located?

Do you think 120 is an exact number they laid out, or just a general round-number estimate of what it might take to lay out a first-class 18 hole championship course in the post-guttie era?   It would also make sense that they might want double the size of their original course, as it was seriously outmoded by that point.   I recall something around November 1910 that said "it is probable that nearly 120 acres" or something like that was written to the membership, but that's hardly definitive language by any standard.

We also know that Lloyd actually purchased 161 acres in December 1910, which included the entire 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate.

Being on the golf committee, why do you think he wouldn't have seen the immediate potential of the quarry and made that part of the land for the MCC course.

I'm not sure there would have been much value for quarry-side homes on the real estate side of things?

Also, as I look at your northwestern line of your proposed 100 acres that you claim they were allocated by Lloyd...

Wouldn't that yellow boundary line you've drawn there really sort of act as a sliding scale, permitting you to move that entire line left or right as needed to come up with a total of 100 acres?? 

The following picture shows the total Johnson Farm boundaries that Lloyd bought in December 1910 in light blue.

The aerial doesn't go far enough north to be able to show the top-most boundary up to College Avenue, but it does beg some obvious questions about why they (Macdonald?) only selected the 100 acres in question that I've generally outlined above;

[Dan Herrmann]

David,
Thanks for the reply.  I was actually just singing the praises of Merion.   Thanks!

All,
How much buzz was there in Montco back then among the new neighbors of the golf course?  I'm assuming that a neighbor would have wanted to help - after all, wouldn't it have improved their own property values?

[DMoriarty]

Dan,

So was I.

As for neighbors, there were RR and Haverford college, and besides that HDC controlled most of the land.  MCC and HDC were keeping things under their hat so they could scoop up land on the cheap.

David,

Thanks for helping move the conversation along.

I have a number of questions, if I might.

1) Connell and HDC made clear that Merion could have as much land as they needed for their golf course.   They seemed to make that very clear when they said, "100 acres, or whatever would be required to lay out the course", which is pretty much an open-ended proposition.   Why do you think they stuck with 100 acres?   If they needed more, wouldn't it have been easier to simply negotiate for more cheap land with HDC (recall they were paying about 1/2 price for land from HDC) rather than go and buy a whole different property with the Dallas Estate?   Also in terms of topography, that land is ok, with a couple of nice features, but it's nothing great for the most part, nor does it feature anything nearly as dramatic as what they had available to them north above the quarry on the Johnson Farm.

I don't think that it was realistically as "open ended" as you suggest, otherwise they wouldnt have mentioned the 100 acres.   

Also, while HDC owned the 140 acre parcel some call the "Johnson Farm," they had only secured the rest of the land through options, and look to have needed the cash from the sale to Merion (plus some more apparently, thus necessitating LLoyd's bridge) to exercise these options and get to developing.   For instance, HDC had only an option on the 56 acre Taylor estate to the west.  This land was actually not purchased until the deal with MCC (through Lloyd.)  Also, recall that one of HDC's conditions for the sale was that Merion quickly build a golf course.   They not only had to exercise their options and develop the land, they also needed to sell the improved land at a higher price because it was adjacent to the golf course.   So realistically, they may have been limited to the Johnson farm, as they may not have been able to afford to sell Merion anything else on the cheap and up front.   

Also, the more land they sold on the cheap to Merion, the less they had to develop.   So HDC had an incentive to keep their acreage down.  As it turned out, the "or whatever is needed to build a course" turned out to be four acres less than the 100 offered, and this may have been what they had in mind all along.   

2) Macdonald and Whigham seemed to identify the potential of the quarry in June 1910 when they stated that "much could be made" of the natural hazard.   Why do you think they didn't recommend that Merion buy easily available land directly due north of the quarry, where the 16th tee is today, as that would have made a very obvious lengthy par four with over 250 available for the drive, and then a lengthy second.   AS it is, they only recommended the purchase of land a mere 65 yards beyond the quarry, limiting Merion to using the quarry for a single par three.   There is no way to create a horizontal hole of any length running west/east using the quarry because the quarry continues all the way to the eastern border of the property?   Who do you think goofed here?

- Most of land north of the quarry was controlled by the College, and I don't think it was for sale.  Do you?   
- As far as I know, it was HCC that set the northern border for the rest of the land, not Merion or whoever "they" is.   HDC is the one who made the offer.
- I presume by "they" you mean M&W or maybe HHB, but you are assuming much more that the record establishes about what they did or didn't do.
- While the swap most likely occurred after Barker did his routing, we don't know whether or not he did it before M&W inspected the property, so it is possible that "they" did recommend the purchase of the land west of HDC.   
- If not, then why do you assume that M&W were even aware that going north was an option?   I've seen no evidence of this at all.   I don't understand where you get this, but it betrays an animosity toward them that I just don't think fits with anything having to do with reality.  In fact, I don't understand any of your assumptions about what M&W recommended or did not recommend, but they don't seem to be fact driven.

I don't think anyone screwed up.   MCC used the land you think they should have, didn't they?

3) Why would the Committee, or Macdonald, or whover, create 13 holes on the lower land when they had to know they didn't have anywhere near enough room left north of that to create five additional holes?    By your own map you tell us that they didn't want to use land west of the course (as Francis tells us it was not part of any golf layout), so after they laid out 13 holes all they had left was the area I have in light purple (and the quarry, unusable for any tee, fairway, or green, is in yellow).   It's clear that there is no space there for more than 3 holes, tops, if they were of any quality, and one of them would have to be a par three.

Here we go again.   
- First, Mike, the holes did not fit as well as they had hoped, so they needed the extra land.
- Second, Francis wrote that there was land to the west that they didn't need.  He didn't write, no way no how did any of our plans go even a few yards west of the current boundary of the course.  So your inflexible boundary along the current property line is not necessarily what they were working with at all.   
- Third, your drawing has the first tee in the wrong spot, and doesn't show all of the room available north of the 1st fairway. Even with the dogleg-right version of the first hole, there would have been room to move 14 substantially back either toward the 1st green or toward the clubhouse.   Move 14 back and you can move the 15th tee back.   Make 16 a cape hole and there you have it.

What I find odd is that the other day when I produced the exact same map and question you basically called me out saying I was horribly misrepresenting your theory.   Yet, I don't see any difference between the area remaining for the final five holes on your map versus what I drew yesterday on Bryan's?

You were and are horribly misrepresenting my theory.   You combine the north border of the 100 acre parcel with the south border of the finalized course, and insist that I think that the entire course had to fit in there.   I never said this and I don’t think it.   As I said above, there is no evidence that they were intent on not going an inch further west than they actually did.  Yes, they ultimately pinched way in across for the clubhouse.  But going up in the corner allowed for this.   Had they not gone up in the corner, they wouldn't have been able to pinch in as much.

Look at all the land they had to work with to the west!    They could have easily been counting on overlapping the 14th green and 15th tee and still would have plenty of room to the west to give up.   Plus, 14 could go back much further than you indicate.

[TEPaul]

"As for the Johnson farm area north of the the red area (including the green triangle) I believe they were planning on developing it, along with the other 200 acres they had secured.   Remember that according to Francis, the green triangle was not part of the land they were considering for the golf course until he figured out the swap.

I've only marked off the portion of the Johnson farm that was most likely to have been offered.   I excluded the narrow strip along the north side of Ardmore and the rectangle that sits out by itself, and the portion west of the Haverford College rectangle (per the Francis statement.)"


As for the Johnson farm area north of the the red area (including the green triangle) I believe they were planning on developing it, along with the other 200 acres they had secured.   Remember that according to Francis, the green triangle was not part of the land they were considering for the golf course until he figured out the swap."




Perhaps you do believe that but that was never mentioned anywhere. The fact is on Dec. 19, 1910 Lloyd took into his own name 161 acres (the entire 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas estate=161 acres).

Richard Francis definitely NEVER said the green triangle was not part of the land they considered for the golf course. If he said that please show me where he said that and don't give us YOUR interpretation of what he meant by the 130x190 statement in 1950 again. To use your demand give us FACTS and not your speculations.

Certainly one of the points of Lloyd taking the entire 140 acre Johnson Farm into his own name in 1910 plus the Dallas estate (do you deny that?) was so that the designers had some latitude with land for routing and design. Cuylers said as much in his Dec. 21, 1910 letter to president Evans (viz. "It was found advisable that the Haverford Development Co. should take title in Mr. Lloyd's name, so that the lines be revised subsequently").

From this we can also see Lloyd controlled the entire Johnson Farm (and the Dallas estate) when the Wilson Committee was appointed and got to work in the winter of 1911 doing "numerous different courses" that were honed down to "five different plans" in March and April 1911, and obviously being the entire Johnson Farm it included that entire block of the Johnson Farm to the west of the Haverford College and MacFadden land. From this we can also see Lloyd obviously had control of HDC at that point. A corporation does not just let anyone put that kind of asset in his own name without his having a very strong position in the corporation (and of course Lloyd (and MCC partners) had that having just recapitalized HDC from a stock cap of $100,000 to 300,000.

AGAIN, you said you think they planned to market that northern rectangle of the Johnson Farm for residential development? IF you do show us where you got that idea.

You may believe some specific amount of land was offered by HDC to MCC but the fact is you've shown nothing at all to indicate that and we have the deed of what H.Gates Lloyd owned on Dec. 19, 1910 and we have Cuylers letter to MCC president Evans about why he did. That is an item you are not aware of and it tells this tale in spades in your essay and your current speculations. You've been speculating on what you think happened but we have the facts in deeds and correspondences and it is undeniable.

 

[DMoriarty]

David,

What is the first mention of 120 acres?   The early Site committee report, which was incorporated into the Nov. letters but is dated in early July wasnt it? 

We know Barker laid out a 6,000 yard course on 100 acres in June 1910, . . .

I know my paper assumes this but I am not so sure.  Connell said this, not Barker.  I think Barker may be the reason they added the Dallas estate.

What is your source for saying they knew as early as June 1910 that they needed 120 acres?

"nearly 120 acres"   because they say it.


Do you think 120 is an exact number they laid out, or just a general round-number estimate of what it might take to lay out a first-class 18 hole championship course in the post-guttie era?   It would also make sense that they might want double the size of their original course, as it was seriously outmoded by that point.   I recall something around November 1910 that said "it is probable that nearly 120 acres" or something like that was written to the membership, but that's hardly definitive language by any standard.

I think it was exact.  "nearly 120 acres."

We also know that Lloyd actually purchased 161 acres in December 1910, which included the entire 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas Estate.

I don't agree with TEPaul's understanding of what was happening here. 

Being on the golf committee, why do you think he wouldn't have seen the immediate potential of the quarry and made that part of the land for the MCC course.

? ? ? ?

I'm not sure there would have been much value for quarry-side homes on the real estate side of things?

Also, as I look at your northwestern line of your proposed 100 acres that you claim they were allocated by Lloyd...

? ? ? ?

Wouldn't that in fact be simply a sliding scale, permitting you to move that entire line left or right as needed to come up with a total of 100 acres?? 

No.

[Peter Pallotta]

I hesitate to ask this at this point, because the discussion is flowing now and the ones who really know their stuff are involved, but Mike's question about why anyone would create the 13 holes when they knew they didn't have room for 5 more (and David's reply that "the holes did not fit as well as they had hoped, so they needed the extra land") brought this to mind:

If I'm remembering correctly, the first mention of CB Macdonald relates to the 6,000 yard course that he sees the potential for (with general yardages on a per-hole basis provided). If I'm also remembering right, when David asked about this 6,000 yard course on another thread, one of the architects here suggested it seemed to him a "boiler-plate" set of numbers/yardages -- so maybe my question is irrelevant for that reason if for no other. But - would the 6,000 yard course as CBM outlined it fit inside the pre-swap/additional area, i.e. the area in which the "holes did not fit as well as they hoped"?

Peter     

Edit - I just read the post that mustove gone up while I was typing. Now I think I might be remembering wrong

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Thanks for typing a lot back at my questions.

I'm sure we have plenty to discuss, but something just occurred to me.

If I read you correctly, you're saying that the Francis Land Swap took place before June 1910, correct?

Otherwise, how could they have known they'd need 120 acres for their already laid out golf course by then?   Am I understanding your premise correctly?

Also...just thinking...the back 14th tee today goes back as far as the end of the clubhouse and the first hole today is a dogleg right.   

I'm not sure how far back you could have moved it with number one being a dogleg left because it would have been in scattershot distance for my left-handed pull-hook. 

There's no way you can get 5 good holes in that land David...Mr. Brauer already told you that.

If you think otherwise, perhaps you can lay them out for us?

Finally, one qualifier I can accept as "close" but two qualifiers and I think we're getting pretty loosey-goosey under any standard.   I'm referring of course to the statement that "it is probable that we will need nearly 120 acres".   

Sounds like someone hedging their very general bets to me much more than it does some being specific in any way.   

[DMoriarty]

TEPaul wrote

Perhaps you do believe that but that was never mentioned anywhere. The fact is on Dec. 19, 1910 Lloyd took into his own name 161 acres (the entire 140 acre Johnson Farm and the 21 acre Dallas estate=161 acres).

Richard Francis definitely NEVER said the green triangle was not part of the land they considered for the golf course. If he said that please show me where he said that and don't give us YOUR interpretation of what he meant by the 130x190 statement in 1950 again. To use your demand give us FACTS and not your speculations.

TEPaul,  it is not "speculation" if I take him exactly at his word.  And I do.

As for Lloyd, I don't deny that the legal title was in his name for the land, but I think you misunderstand his role in this process.  My understanding is that he was a bridge, a guarantor, and/or was holding collateral, and that he had legal obligations concerning this land to HDC, MCC, or both.   A little like a bank holding a deed, only in a business setting.  I explained this in detail to Wayne shortly after my essay was published.

Take a look at the fragment of the Cuyler letter that you have finally brought forward (my bold):

"It was found advisable that the Haverford Development Co. should take title in Mr. Lloyd's name, so that the lines be revised subsequently"

It doesn't say that Lloyd took title.  It says that HDC is taking title in Lloyd's name.   In other words Lloyd is taking title on behalf of Haverford Development Company.   As their agent, and with fiduciary obligations to them.   This is entirely different than what you have claimed, that Lloyd himself took title. 

Also, you have speculated that Lloyd held onto the other 40+ acres when he transferred some of the land back to Freeman who transferred it to MCC.    I think you are wrong here as well.   I think the remaining acreage went to HDC.  It wasn't his land.  It was  HDC's.

Also, I think  you are mistaken that Lloyd controlled HDC.  He and others recapitalized the stock, but I do not think that he or they took a majority interest. 
 
By the way, what property, exactly, is the Cuylers letter referring to?  The Dallas Estate,  the HDC property, or both?   It could go either way. 

And what does the letter say about what had been planned?

[TEPaul]

TEPaul,  it is not "speculation" if I take him exactly at his word.  And I do."

David:

Seriously, and I have said this to you before on this thread---it is NOT not taking him at his word; it is taking him at YOUR INTERPRETATION of what he MEANT by 130x190!!

If you cannot or never will admit that YOUR INTERPETATION of what he meant by that IS THE ONLY WAY to interpret what he meant than this will never get resloved with you.

But at this point, what does it really matter? The fact is you use and always have a speciously clever tactic of argumentation on this entire issue in that you constantly try to limit all discussion just to that small part of his story. If you look at the rest of his story any reasonable mind can see that he did not mean to say what YOUR INTERPRETATION of 130x190 meant!! 

The other convincer is it is both on the ground and throughout MCC's records. You've fucked with the entire timeline and the fact that you'll never admit how wrong you've been all along is pretty much the point here.

The funniest thing of all about Francis's 130X190 remark is it is clear to see what he meant by the result of the extended base (and actually the shortened height (that "green" triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan is actually over 300 yards long because I walkee it the other day

No, the truth of Merion's original history is definitely not your interest and it never has been. Your interest has always been more transparent than that.



My post #463 is THE ANSWER to when the Francis land swap really happened and how! Someday, when you learn how to be less defensive about all this you will see the clarity and provability of that explanation. But as long as you just deny what the records and correspondences say you will never understand it. It is so funny to me that you have actually said that everyone who was there at the time and reported on it since they contradict your revisionism must have been either mistake or engaging in hyperbole. Have you yourself noticed how often you've done that with the accounts of people there. Not a very convincing argument THAT! 

[DMoriarty]

Thanks for typing a lot back at my questions.

My intent was to answer them, rather than type a lot back.

If I read you correctly, you're saying that the Francis Land Swap took place before June 1910, correct?

No.  I think it most likely happened before July 1, 1910, but it could have happened after this, but before Nov. 15.  More likely in the Summer than Fall.  

Otherwise, how could they have known they'd need 120 acres for their already laid out golf course by then?   Am I understanding your premise correctly?

I think that by July 1, 1910, they had a rough course plan and needed "nearly 120 acres" for that course.   It is possible that they squeezed themselves too much, and that the Francis swapped happened after, but likely before Nov. 15, 1910.  

Also...just thinking...the back 14th tee today goes back as far as the end of the clubhouse and the first hole today is a dogleg right.   

I'm not sure how far back you could have moved it with number one being a dogleg left because it would have been in scattershot distance for my left-handed pull-hook. 

There's no way you can get 5 good holes in that land David...Mr. Brauer already told you that.

If you think otherwise, perhaps you can lay them out for us?

Did you read my post?   I never said they would fit in the land as you understand it.  Your undestanding of the width and depth differs from mine.  Don't pinch the road quite so much, push back the 14th tee, and overlap the 14th green and 15th tee.  Shorten 16.   It doesn't fit easy, but it is close.  And THE WHOLE POINT IS THAT THE HOLES DID NOT FIT.  

And Jeff said they did fit in MY drawing.

Finally, one qualifier I can accept as "close" but two qualifiers and I think we're getting pretty loosey-goosey under any standard.   I'm referring of course to the statement that "it is probable that we will need nearly 120 acres".   

That is up to you Mike, and is no concern of mine.

Sounds like someone hedging their very general bets to me much more than it does some being specific in any way.   

Do you understand the meaning of the word probable?

Mike, this debate with you  whether anyone can fit holes your drawing is over as far as I am concerned.  I have answered your questions over and over again.    If you disagree then so be it, but lets move on.

[DMoriarty]

TEPaul,  it is not "speculation" if I take him exactly at his word.  And I do."

David:

Seriously, and I have said this to you before on this thread---it is NOT not taking him at his word; it is taking him at YOUR INTERPRETATION of what he MEANT by 130x190!!

If you cannot or never will admit that YOUR INTERPETATION of what he meant by that IS THE ONLY WAY to interpret what he meant than this will never get resloved with you.

But at this point, what does it really matter? The fact is you use and always have a speciously clever tactic of argumentation on this entire issue in that you constantly try to limit all discussion just to that small part of his story. If you look at the rest of his story any reasonable mind can see that he did not mean to say what YOUR INTERPRETATION of 130x190 meant!! 

The other convincer is it is both on the ground and throughout MCC's records. You've fucked with the entire timeline and the fact that you'll never admit how wrong you've been all along is pretty much the point here.

The funniest thing of all about Francis's 130X190 remark is it is clear to see what he meant by the result of the extended base (and actually the shortened height (that "green" triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan is actually over 300 yards long because I walkee it the other day

No, the truth of Merion's original history is definitely not your interest and it never has been. Your interest has always been more transparent than that.



My post #463 is THE ANSWER to when the Francis land swap really happened and how!

TEPaul, if you cannot be civil or offer anything that advances the conversation, then you have no place here. 

[Bryan Izatt]

I see we've gone back to conjecture.  

To meet my commitment to David to measure the area of his "red 100 acres", I did, and it was about 105 acres.  I see that subsequently he adjusted the boundaries to get it closer to 100 acres.  For whatever it's worth the rectangle of land north of the "red 100 acres" and including the green triangle is about 14 acres.

Mike,

I am still interested in the Haverford College boundary markers on the current Google map.  Both the west and the south would be good.  Two on each axis.  Sorry for being tiresome.    I guess I'm still not convinced that there wasn't 130 yards there.

[DMoriarty]

Here again, is the Francis statement in its entirety.

"Except for many hours over a drawing board, running instruments in the field and just plain talking, I made but one important contribution to the layout of the course.

The land was shaped like a capital "L" and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion - with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore Avenue - but the fast five holes were another question.

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

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

[TEPaul]

Oh, by the way, if Francis meant YOUR INTERPRETATION of what he meant ---130x190 is a rectangle and not an area that is shaped like the area of Merion in question here.

A minor point in the argument here with some for sure, but not to me!  

[DMoriarty]

I see we've gone back to conjecture.  

To meet my commitment to David to measure the area of his "red 100 acres", I did, and it was about 105 acres.  I see that subsequently he adjusted the boundaries to get it closer to 100 acres.  For whatever it's worth the rectangle of land north of the "red 100 acres" and including the green triangle is about 14 acres.

I am trying to avoid conjecture as much as possible, but many of the questions being asked require conjecture, and if I don't answer them I get attacked for that.  

As for your measurement, I didn't intend for the red space to be the basis for exact measure (I think I made this clear in my post)  For one thing it was based on the 1908 atlas, and the 1908 altas has the southern border significantly different that what was actually purchased.  (My guess is that if you checked the Johnson farm on that map that it would come out to be a bit more than 140.)

The yellow shape is based on a combination of the 1908 and the 1913 (for a southern border) Atlases.  But it still may be a bit off.  

The yellow shape is 100.36 Acres.   I think they were offering these 100 acres, or something close to it.   

[TEPaul]

"a.  The red area represents approximately what I think Merion was offered to use for their course.   It consists of the width of the “Johnson farm” below the south end of the Haverford college rectangle."



THat is simply categorically wrong; it really is. Horatio Gates Lloyd bought the ENTIRE Johnson Farm, including the rectangle in the north on College Ave and he did so in the interest of MCC and bascially MCC's agent and negotiator in this entire deal. Matter of fact Lloyd was made the president of the Merion Cricket Club Golf Association CORPORATION up front, formed almost simultaneously to his taking 161 acres into his name for the sole purpose of moving boundary lines subsequently for the design process of the Wilson Committee to come. THIS is a document David Moriarty had never seen and was totally unaware of when he wrote his essay.   It's a document explained to him many times but he denies it.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()