News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #575 on: May 22, 2009, 06:00:12 PM »
Tom,

What else did the Haverford Development Company or Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Company ever do? Are there any other business dealings?

Any chance there were other considerations that would dictate transferring this land for $1? By considerations I mean land somewhere else...

Thanks

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #576 on: May 22, 2009, 06:30:35 PM »
Sully:

As far as I know HDC did the residential development delineated by Golf House Road over to the west to I believe Coopertown Rd and Tunbridge Rd which actually goes up into the land above College and then circles back and lets out right across the street from where Club House Road starts at College Ave near the Merion practice range. That 68 acre section above College Ave was owned by HDC too. It was part of the remaining 221 acres after taking the original 96 out of the Johnson Farm and selling it to MCC plus the Dallas estate that made up the original 117 acres MCC agreed to buy. Again, on the transfer in July 1911 from Lloyd to MCCGA Corp they upped it by three more acres to 120.1 instead of the original 117 MCC agreed to purchase in Nov. 1910

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #577 on: May 22, 2009, 06:42:13 PM »
Jim,

Let me see if this makes more sense...

Here's the various properties before HDC took control of them for the Merion deal.   You can see that the Johnson Farm (titled "Haverford Terrace - Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Company) is the biggest plot by far, and extends from Ardmore Ave to College Avenue, interrupted north only by land owned by Haverford College and the landowner just above them.



Reports say that the purchase of 338 acres was for five different plots, but I'm only counting four from this map...perhaps someone can identify the 5th.

In any case, someone also determined that a public road needed to be the delineation between Golf course land to the east  and the Real Estate component to the west, and that a squared-off, straight-line, rectangular-intersecting road would never fit with the countrified landed gentry aesthetic they were looking for.   Instead, they favored slow curves, and subtle lines of movement, and believed in the dictum that nature never built a straight line.

So, let's "approximate" that and draw a slowly curving road up the middle of the Johnson land running north/south (and please forgive my attempts at drawing).



Holy Crap, Batman!!

I think I just accomplished the Francis Land Swap!  ;)  ;D


You can see that the "triangle" effect is suddenly artificially created by my putting a road in there and extends about 300 yards up to College Avenue at the north end, and is about 95-100 yards wide at the base, getting narrower and narrower as we get closer to College Avenue.   

I tried to show this back on Page one of this thread by outlining the original Johnson Farm land in Blue on the 1910 Land Plan (copied below), but I think the original 1908 map makes my point clearer above.

« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 11:38:39 PM by MCirba »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #578 on: May 22, 2009, 06:49:33 PM »
Mike,

If construction started 4-19, after the final land swap was recorded in the minutes, then wouldn't we have to say that its likely that the story about the dynamite going off a few days later might be a bit of drama?  The way it was told by Francis, it seemed as if construction might have been underway already, but if the records are right, they finished the land deal and got title before starting construction. (which would be the proper way to do things)

But if all that is true, and Francis contention about blasting is also true, then it must be that they began construction on the Quarry holes, which of course could happen, although most folks would start somewhere easier.  But as someone said earlier, perhaps Francis sort of combined and compressed the actual timeline of events when tellng the story many years later.

I agree with Shiv that in a friendly deal, that land swap idea could have generated anytime after the CBM visit in June 1910.  We are arguing a lot of things here, but overall, from June 1910 to April 1911 isn't a lot of time to put together the routing.  Even though Lloyd took formal control in November and sold the piece I think the germ of the L shape came earlier - about the time Barker came out and they were first deciding how to put a golf course and subdivision out there.  CBM offered advice later that summer.

Again, if it were TePaul on that committee, you would have been working on the routing over cornflakes or wine constantly from the day you saw the CBM letter, whether on some committee officially or not, knowing full well the deal was a 99% lock to be consumated over time.  So, please note that even though I am saying the swap could have happened earlier I am not making the leap that it means CBM designed the golf course.

To all,

Should we start an over/under on how many more times TePaul will tell us in 500 words or more that DM is wrong?  It reminds me of the old joke about prisones telling jokes by number because they had heard them so many times!  Maybe TePaul can replace all his typing with the number 4-19-11 and save both us and himself some time and Ran some band width.  And, we will know he still thinks DM is wrong.........when we see those numbers!

Do you think we have the memory shorter than the life span of a fruit fly, TEPaul?  We get it.  I only read to find out what damn land was in that triangle.  So far, I am not convinced of either theory totally (road jiggling vs whole triangle) even though I was formally convinced it was road jiggling and still lean that way.

Should we put it to a vote to see who favors the road jiggle and who believes the entire triangle just to see how the jury might vote later?  I will go with the road jiggle just because I can't see Merion trading back more than they got (even with the triangle) and still buyting 3 more acres from Lloyd and HDC.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #579 on: May 22, 2009, 06:50:45 PM »
Mike,

Cross post, so why not draw the land swapped (in your opinion) in two colors. I still don't get it from that map.

Its either a road jiggle for just a few acres or its the whole triangle, unless you think they gave back more land right near college ave.

As to my last post, DM can just type "HHB" and we will all know he thinks the course was routed earlier.

Maybe with a vote we can move on to the next topic - just how much influenence did that CBM/NGLA meeting have on the finished hole designs, which is just as important in the credit argument.  We know there was an Alps, etc. but also that Wilson seemed to shy away from the geometricl ook of CBM, even in his acknowledgements to the Board.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 06:53:05 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #580 on: May 22, 2009, 06:57:08 PM »
Jeff,

All I'm trying to indicate with that drawing is that the whole idea of someone actually  "PICKING" out the land indicated by triangle is likely a silly idea.

The surveyor just estimated a boundary and ran a curving road up the map from bottom to top of the Johnson Farm, from Ardmore Avenue to College Avenue.

The only reason it looks like a triangle up on top is because of the jutting rectangular land of Haverford College and the property above it intersecting into the Johnson farm, narrowing the northern section.

This "approximate road" was the "working boundary" if you will, with Lloyd on both sides of the aisle.

They didn't "pick" land in a narrow triangular shape, although I'm quite sure they all wanted to go well north of the quarry because that way you approach the scenic quarry from above, coming downhill and visibly towards it's visually intimidating presence...you can't route any holes south to north across the quarry unless it's a cliff-top par three like 17 because they'd be absurdly blind...

Macdonald's own recommendation was that much could be made of the quarry so I'm sure he wouldn't have recommended they only purchase 65 yards north of it originally as David contends.

The curving road was simply drawn to split the property into estimated portions and that's what they worked from.

When all other options are exhausted, what's left is what is simplest and is almost always the answer. 

After the Francis Land Swap took place, what's the first thing they did?

Did they run up to the top of the hill and build the 15th green and 16th tee up in the triangle they supposedly just purchased that they supposedly couldn't fit in place??

NO, they built the primo hole that they were trying to fit into their boundary constraints...the awesome 16th with either a full carry approach over the quarry, OR the optional longer 3-shot route to the right, which is why the needed the additional width.   

The 16th would have been an obvious hole to anyone and everyone...I'm sure Barker saw it if he was looking at that part of the property, and I'm sure Macdonald and Whigham did as well.   You can't miss it.   Only I'm sure reality set in once they realized that almost all of their membership would not be able to make the full quarry carry on the second shot, so they had to come up with an alternate route they didn't at first anticipate having to build.

Only to do that they needed to push out the 14th green, the 15th tee, and much of the left side of the 15th fairway further left than the working boundary...that's all there is to it.

I'd bet my house on it.


Jeff....p.s.....  It was just an adjustment in the working boundary.   

Think about it...this boundary was established and was what they were working with trying to route the course for a number of months.   At some point a fake boundary becomes a real one in your head because you're trying to work within that limitation, also with real estate $ to consider.

But I'm sure Francis, as he said, was looking at the map and Voila!, how about we just move the freaking boundary out a bit west up top and in a bit east on the bottom.

I bet he also did his best Homer Simpson, saying, "DUH"!  ;D

Jeff...pps....I didn't color code anything because it's the color coding on that Freaking November 1910 Land Plan that is respsonsible for creating so much of the confusion in the first place!!  :P

It makes it look like clearly chosen and delineated parcels when instead someone just drew a "approximate" softly curving road up through the middle of the Johnson Farm roughly showing the real estate and golf components and didn't know 100 years later we'd be a bunch of freaking numbnuts about what it meant!!  ;D
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 11:40:27 PM by MCirba »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #581 on: May 22, 2009, 07:15:24 PM »
"Reports say that the purchase of 338 acres was for five different plots, but I'm only counting four from this map...perhaps someone can identify the 5th."

The 5th tract was 68 acres north of College Ave.

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #582 on: May 22, 2009, 07:18:36 PM »
"Reports say that the purchase of 338 acres was for five different plots, but I'm only counting four from this map...perhaps someone can identify the 5th."

The 5th tract was 68 acres north of College Ave.


Thanks, Tom....

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #583 on: May 22, 2009, 07:31:24 PM »
Straight, harsh, rectangular roads were for the business of the madding crowds in the city...

The aesthetic needed out here in the land of the country gentlemen was much less practical and more artistically sophisticated and gentler on the eye.

Here's David's own drawing of the road system that was quickly built;


Patrick_Mucci

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #584 on: May 22, 2009, 09:41:47 PM »
TEPaul,

Amongst other things, here's what I don't understand.

If MCC had no interest in their archives, evidenced by the fact that they let them sit collecting dust in an attic for a century,
why are they now inclined to keep them a secret ?

If MCC didn't value those archives for a century, why are they now sequestering them ?

What caused MCC to suddenly value and insulate their archives ?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #585 on: May 22, 2009, 09:50:24 PM »
300 yards multiplied by 100 yards then divided by two to get 15,000 square yards...or about 3.1 acres...

How is it that you see the triangle's presence in Nov. 1910 as proof that they didn't have a golf course laid out yet?

That, to me, is the ultimate proof that they knew they were going to use that area for golf holes...what am I missing?

Jim,

Without getting into geometric proportions, wouldn't the land need to be rectangular for that acreage calc to be accurate?

ABSOLUTELY NOT
   That's not important, though...

The only reason that area is a triangle is because Haverford College and the property above it were not part of the Johnson Farm that they purchased, which ran all the way to College Avenue, and because someone decided probably for aesthetic reasons that Golf House Road would be long, sweeping, flowing curves.

I'm sure based on looking at the property that they wanted to use land north of the quarry from the get-go.   

Go up and stand on the 16th tee and tell me that they would have missed THAT opportunity when they already really owned the land in question through Lloyd's dealing on both sides of the table....that instead they would have only simply looked to buy land up to the middle of the 15th fairway, a mere 65 yards beyond the quarry as David is suggesting.

Mike, While it might seem logical to us, with the benefit if 20-20 hindsight, your comment is speculative in nature.
   That instead, sometime later after they had already laid out 13 holes and were quickly running out of room they did a big oopsie and said, oh boy, how could we have been such a stupids! 

It wouldn't be the first or last time errors were made on a golf course.
Even though it might seem logical or prudent to us, you can't make speculative assumptions with respect to their thought processes at the time.


In theory, and as the map was drawn, they could have gone all the way up to College Avenue for those holes because that's where the Johnson Farm land ran to.   


Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #586 on: May 22, 2009, 09:55:47 PM »
In retrospect, I can't believe how obvious this thing has been.

Look again at the "approximate road".




Can anyone actually believe that the smooth curvilinear, equidistant lines of the proposed, "approximate" road were there BECAUSE THEY FIT THE GOLF COURSE DESIGN?!?!?!?   ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

No wonder that the property marked as Golf Course doesn't equal exactly 117 acres!   :o

All along we're struggling for years with how this fit together and we we're measuring aerials and parsing statements and twisting words and find out that all along we're working with an imaginary road design drawn through a map to indicate a hypothetical boundary line for the golf course!!  :-\ :-\ :-\ ::) :P

Man...sometimes we are much too clever by half.   I don't know about you guys, but I feel like an idiot!

Somewhere, a bunch of these guys are laughing their asses off at us, and probably collectively thinking.....hey...dudes...we were just trying to build a good golf course!   ;D

Did we succeed?

Then dudes, lighten the f*ck up! 

Oh...and by the way...

Get a life before you're up here in the grandstands with us  ;D
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 10:05:38 PM by MCirba »

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #587 on: May 22, 2009, 10:12:18 PM »
I just had the solution come to me thanks to Mike's post.

We all go out to the 16th tee tomorrow night at midnight and hold a seance.  OK - or maybe just a Ouija board where we can ask old Hugh Wilson what really happened.


What's great about 16 tee is that iit's so close to the road that we can get on and out pretty easily.

Who else is in?  :)
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 10:16:47 PM by Dan Herrmann »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #588 on: May 22, 2009, 10:18:06 PM »
Jeff,

All I'm trying to indicate with that drawing is that the whole idea of someone actually  "PICKING" out the land indicated by triangle is likely a silly idea.

The surveyor just estimated a boundary and ran a curving road up the map from top to bottom of the Johnson Farm, from Ardmore Avenue to College Avenue.

Mike, HOW do you know that ?


The only reason it looks like a triangle up on top is because of the jutting rectangular land of Haverford College and the property above it intersecting into the Johnson farm, narrowing the northern section.

Now, you're going to tell us what a triangle looks like ?  ?  ?   ;D


This "approximate road" was the "working boundary" if you will, with Lloyd on both sides of the aisle.

They didn't "pick" land in a narrow triangular shape,

HOW do you know that ?


although I'm quite sure they all wanted to go well north of the quarry because that way you approach the scenic quarry from above, coming downhill and visibly towards it's visually intimidating presence...you can't route any holes south to north across the quarry unless it's a cliff-top par three like 17 because they'd be absurdly blind...

Macdonald's own recommendation was that much could be made of the quarry so I'm sure he wouldn't have recommended they only purchase 65 yards north of it originally as David contends.

HOW do you know that ?


The curving road was simply drawn to split the property into estimated portions and that's what they worked from.

Mike, you know that I'm giving you a hard time because you keep making leaps of faith and speculating.
This is a difficult subject to try to comprehend and excessive speculation doesn't help to unravel any mysteries.


When all other options are exhausted, what's left is what is simplest and is almost always the answer. 

That's not necessarily true


After the Francis Land Swap took place, what's the first thing they did?

Did they run up to the top of the hill and build the 15th green and 16th tee up in the triangle they supposedly just purchased that they supposedly couldn't fit in place??

It's certainly possible, and, they may have had valid reasons for doing so.
You can't rule it out just because you feel it's not practical, especially since you don't have all of the pertinent information.


NO, they built the primo hole that they were trying to fit into their boundary constraints...the awesome 16th with either a full carry approach over the quarry, OR the optional longer 3-shot route to the right, which is why the needed the additional width.   

The 16th would have been an obvious hole to anyone and everyone...I'm sure Barker saw it if he was looking at that part of the property, and I'm sure Macdonald and Whigham did as well.   You can't miss it.   

You can't miss it because that's what's there today.
You have the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, something they didn't have.


Only I'm sure reality set in once they realized that almost all of their membership would not be able to make the full quarry carry on the second shot, so they had to come up with an alternate route they didn't at first anticipate having to build.

Only to do that they needed to push out the 14th green, the 15th tee, and much of the left side of the 15th fairway further left than the working boundary...that's all there is to it.

I'd bet my house on it.

I hope you have a summer residence  ;D



Jeff....p.s.....  It was just an adjustment in the working boundary.   

Think about it...this boundary was established and was what they were working with trying to route the course for a number of months.   At some point a fake boundary becomes a real one in your head because you're trying to work within that limitation, also with real estate $ to consider.

But I'm sure Francis, as he said, was looking at the map and Voila!, how about we just move the freaking boundary out a bit west up top and in a bit east on the bottom.

Mike, it's well known that I occassionally speak with CBM and SR whenever I'm in Southampton, but, when did you start speaking with the parties involved at Merion ? ;D   ;D

What would be helpful would be the following.

START with listing the facts that everyone agrees with.

Once a list of agreed upon facts is established, it will then allow all to discuss facts/issues that are not agreed upon.

I think this would narrow the scope of the debate.

Just a thought  



Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #589 on: May 22, 2009, 10:29:11 PM »
Patrick,

Your buddy CB was there!   He sends his best wishes...

 Whigham and Barker too!!   Hugh Wilson and the Merion guys, and even that stuff-shirt Lloyd!

They were half rolling on the ground laughing and half shaking their heads in dismay that we ddn't have anything better to do than spend our collective, precious time debating about a fictitious road boundary on an ancient approximated map!

Look again at what is drawn up through the middle of this and tell me any golf course, anywhere in the world, where a boundary would be "drawn to the golf course layout" and LOOK LIKE THAT!



Perhaps they were looking to get a 3-yard wide green up in the top of the triangle?!!!?  ::)  ;D

THe whole thing is an illusion based on our interpretations of a curving road drawn through a hypothetical illustration of the general proposed land plan...the type of thing anyone who's ever sat through a prospectus of a real-estate venture has seen a hundred times.

Pat...we're idiots.   The whole lot of us on this thread. 
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 10:35:59 PM by MCirba »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #590 on: May 22, 2009, 10:34:02 PM »

Mike,

I think you've hit on an important point, and that is that early maps/schematics and newspaper accounts can't be viewed as 100 % accurate.

As to the approximate location of the road I thought that had been mentioned previously.... by David, but, it's late and the perhaps the anesthesia is still affecting me.

Measuring a boundary or feature that hasn't been created, but is illustrated, can certainly lead one in the wrong direction.

It's interesting to observe the attempt to reconstruct the land acquisitions and formation of the land upon which a great golf course would be built.

My particular interest is how they eventually came to construct the crossovers.
It seems that without them, they never could have figured out a great routing.


P.S.  I can't argue/deny the "idiot" label. ;D
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 10:36:35 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #591 on: May 22, 2009, 10:38:15 PM »

Mike,

I think you've hit on an important point, and that is that early maps/schematics and newspaper accounts can't be viewed as 100 % accurate.

As to the approximate location of the road I thought that had been mentioned previously.... by David, but, it's late and the perhaps the anesthesia is still affecting me.

Measuring a boundary or feature that hasn't been created, but is illustrated, can certainly lead one in the wrong direction.

It's interesting to observe the attempt to reconstruct the land acquisitions and formation of the land upon which a great golf course would be built.

My particular interest is how they eventually came to construct the crossovers.
It seems that without them, they never could have figured out a great routing.


P.S.  I can't argue/deny the "idiot" label. ;D


Patrick,

I think we're on the same page...

Please read my last edit about sitting through a Real Estate Prospectus presentation and I think you'll know exactly what i'm referring to.

This entire thing has been a classic example of us not being able to see the forest for the trees.   

We have been so focused on trying to determine the meaning of a triangular piece of land and the timing of when it was created that we forgot to step back and see the bigger picture.   It's only when you view it in broad perspective, both literally and figuratively, that it's utter meaninglessness comes fully into view.

Get some rest, my friend.

We have more real life ahead.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 11:27:59 PM by MCirba »

henrye

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #592 on: May 22, 2009, 10:42:25 PM »
Pat, my guess is that TEPaul will likely not respond to your query.

TEPaul,

Amongst other things, here's what I don't understand.

If MCC had no interest in their archives, evidenced by the fact that they let them sit collecting dust in an attic for a century,
why are they now inclined to keep them a secret ?

My guess is that they are not so inclined.

If MCC didn't value those archives for a century, why are they now sequestering them ?

I don't think they are.

What caused MCC to suddenly value and insulate their archives ?

I think it has been brought to their attention that they have some interesting and valuable information, but I suspect they have no real intention of insulating them.  Remember, they didn't even know they had this stuff until Wayne went and dug it up.  If someone was respectful of the club and asked to review the same material that Wayne and TEPaul have seen, I see no reason why MCC would turn them away.  Just a guess.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2009, 03:51:06 PM by HenryE »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #593 on: May 23, 2009, 12:11:21 AM »
Mike Cirba:

You get some interesting revelations sometimes, don't you?  ;)

I don't see why that Nov. 15. 1910 land plan wasn't fairly close to what they started to work on but I've mentioned something a number of times on here that nobody seems to pick up on. Wilson and his committee when they began "laying out numerous different courses and plans" were fairly obviously not working with that Nov. 15, 1910 PROPOSED land plan to lay out those numerous different courses and plans; they were working with TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY maps of the property. I think I've mentioned that about 20 times on these Merion threads and most of the time I've mentioned I know that because it is mentioned in the first letter Hugh Wilson wrote to Russell Oakley of the US Dept. of Agriculture. I think I first mentoned that on these Merion threads some years ago.

Less than a week ago Jeff Brauer had the good sense to ask if that is what we've been considering on here and I told him those topo survey maps that they laid out their courses and plans on have never been found. I've also mentioned a number of times that when Lesley gave the report to the board of Wilson's report it was mentioned in the minutes that the plan they were asking the board for approval of was actually attached to the report. Please don't tell me anyone following this thread thought that final lay out was on that Nov. 15, 1910 PROPOSED land plan.   ::) :P ???

But noone I know of from Merion has ever seen any of those topo (contour) survey plans Wilson mentioned to Oakley (he also mentioned it had "lettered sections" on it) so I guess it and the rest of them were lost years ago. HOWEVER, we cannot necessarily assume that the dimensions of that yet to be built road were on their topo survey maps they used to create their numerous courses and plans in precisely the same way it is on that PROPOSED golf course plan of Nov. 15, 1910 ("approximate road location").

I know it seems odd to most on here since that essay has tried to convince everyone that Francis and Lloyd via some plan from Macdonald/Whigam or even HH Barker had something like a fairly finalized golf course layout BEFORE the Wilson Committee WAS APPOINTED or Wilson himself even became involved!?! ;)

I mean, honestly, how illogical is that!?   ::)

The reason that essay said that, as you may recall, is the essay was trying to make the contention that the Wilson Committee didn't route or design anything at all; they merely BUILT the golf course to someone else's plan. Remember his remark in the essay about what "lay out" meant in the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY? ;)

Of course, that was BEFORE Wayne found that Wilson report less than a year ago and after that essay that Lesley gave to the board. That too never made it over to Merion G.C. and had been sitting at MCC in some attic for probably a century. Desmond Tolhurst apparently never saw it because he certainly didn't mention it in his two history books.

SO, it's not really a matter of what that "approximate road" looks like on that Nov. 15, 1910 PROPOSED land plan, although I don't see any necessary reason why Pugh and Hubbard (Nov. 15, 1910 proposed land plan surveyors) didn't draw it in scale on their plan. What is really important, however, is what it looked like on the Wilson Committee's TOPO survey maps that they used WHEN the Wilson Committee was appointed and they BEGAN laying out courses and plans on THOSE topo survey maps in the winter and early spring of 1911.

Maybe we will get lucky and find one but it sure as hell isn't as if we haven't been looking for them for a number of years now. Just within the last two weeks I was hopeful one or more may turn up out of that attic at MCC but the MCC historian has assured me he has never seen something like that over there and they certainly are beginning to get into those old MCC archives now. It is a very big building though, VERY big, and so I'm still hopeful.

Find one of those things and most of our questions will finally be answered, I'm quite sure.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 12:31:11 AM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #594 on: May 23, 2009, 12:26:46 AM »
I see we have left behind all traces of a factual discussion behind and are sailing through fantasy land.  Too bad.  We were starting to get somewhere. 


Mike Cirba,

I am trying to be civil but I am very frustrated that every time you TRY to represent my argument you are flat out WRONG.   I wish you'd leave my argument to me.  Is that too much to ask?

Mike,


When did David suggest they only bought land up to 65 yards above the quarry?

Jim,

David told us that the original 117 acres they purchased was included within the red lines;


- I NEVER TOLD YOU THAT, BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUE!   They WERE OFFERED the land within the red lines, but they did not accept the offer because THE LAST FIVE HOLES DID NOT FIT AS THEY HAD HOPED, so they negotiated the addition of the north corner and the gave up a bunch of land they did not need to the east.    Then Lloyd bought the property.  Then they refined the plan.

- So your theory about how they were squeezed at the mid-section of the course?   It has nothing to do with my position, and isn't based on anything I have said.   For one thing, it is based 1/2 on the "APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE ROAD" and 1/2 on the final location of the road.   Nothing to do with me or my position at all.  There was NO SQUEEZING in the land offered, they had more than enough horizontal room.   I HAVE NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THEY SWAPPED FOR THE 14TH GREEN AND 15TH TEE AND FAIRWAY.  Under my theory this is nonsensical.   There was plenty of room for both these holes.

-  And your theory about how under my theory HHB/M&W/Merion must have been fools to not have seen the potential of putting the tee back further?   NOTHING TO DO WITH MY ACTUAL THEORY AT ALL.   UNDER MY THEORY THAT LAND WAS NOT AVAILABLE until the FRANCIS LAND SWAP.   Surely you do not fault them for not using land that WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO THEM.

-  And your theory that Lloyd had already purchased the land when I THINK the swap occurred.   Totally WRONG.

Et cetera.

You are arguing against demons of your own making, but you might find my actual positions a bit more challenging.

And by the way Mike, I do agree that they would have seen the value of this corner land early on.  That is another reason to think the swap likely occurred in the Summer 1910, before the land was even purchased.

Your latest manipulations of the maps aren't really worth responding to, except to say that if they wanted curvy roads they could have curved the road at the south border of the college land west, over toward the actual border of the johnson farm property (which you have WAY to far West), then curved it south and curved it all the way down to Ardmore Ave.   In other words, there were no roads yet and they could have done curvy roads in a number of different places.   So curvy roads dont resolve anything.
___________________________________

Jeff,

I understand what you are saying about the blasting, but I don't think your theory matches with the facts.    Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to think that the swap occurred on the eve of the Board Meeting, April 19, 1911, and that the construction and blasting started a few days later.   I don't think this is feasible for a these reasons, among others:

1.   As I understand the fragments of the minutes brought forward thus far, M&W came down to re-inspect the property and decide upon the final routing on April 6, and M&W chose the routing that was presented to the board.    NOTHING ABOUT CHANGING THIS ROUTING BETWEEN THE 6th and the 19th.   And nothing to support the view that they were still having trouble fitting the holes AFTER CBM's second visit.   So I see no support for putting the swap right before construction began.

2.   We have no reason to believe that Lloyd had total control of the land.    He took title ON BEHALF OF HDC.   I don't think it is reasonable to think he could unilaterally change the borders instantly, without negotiating with the rest of HDC.  Remember, they were likely planning as well, and would have had to have had a say about this.

3.  I have no reason to believe that the quarry was blasted during primary construction by Merion.  Francis did not write that Merion blasted the quarry.  He wrote that the quarryman did.   I have never read anything indicating that this happened under Merion's watch.   

Do you agree that HDC may have blasted the rock to help get the sale?   

Hypothetical Merion:  'We'll do the deal if 1) we get about 4 acres up in this corner; 2) you can keep and develop a big swath of land on the eastern border of the Johnson Farm; and 3) have your quarryman blast us a place for the 16th green so we can be sure it will work.''   
Hypothetical HDC:  'We'll blast it day after tomorrow.  Let's get this deal done.'

Is this really less plausible that an override of the plan that CBM approved; unreported to the board; after a complicated renegotiation with the seller, then blasting a couple of days later? 
_______________________________________

Jim,  Please see my post above to Mike Cirba.   He is misrepresenting my theory, and then shooting holes into his own misrepresentations.

________________________________________

TEPaul,

I've read your above post, hoping you'd provide some of what you have promised, but I didn't find a single bit of new information or analysis in it.  Was there any point to the post except to take another baseless shot at my essay? 

_________________________________________________

To All,

Is there any chance we can return to an actual factual discussion any time soon?     

TEPaul has promised a FACTUAL refutation of my understanding of what happened, but none has been forthcoming.

Would anyone else like to see this?

Also, quite a while ago TEPaul promised a detailed Timeline with FACTS ONLY.  That'd be helpful, wouldn't it?   
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 12:31:26 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #595 on: May 23, 2009, 12:38:29 AM »
alsfjsa d;fje9riw0= vn=90t
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #596 on: May 23, 2009, 01:10:40 AM »
“To All,
Is there any chance we can return to an actual factual discussion any time soon?”


I’ll certainly consider returning to a strictly factual discussion as soon as you tell us all where in the world you found a scintilla of a FACT to suggest this:

“They WERE OFFERED the land within the red lines, but they did not accept the offer because THE LAST FIVE HOLES DID NOT FIT AS THEY HAD HOPED, so they negotiated the addition of the north corner and they gave up a bunch of land they did not need to the east.    Then Lloyd bought the property.  Then they refined the plan.”

Moriarty, where in hell do you come up with complete garbage like that? I swear to GOD you are really trying people’s patience on here with that kind of total horseshit!

You harp on people on here for not supporting what they say with FACTS!?

Show us any FACT at all to suggest that preposterous statement of yours. And don’t come back with your constant accusations of people INSULTING YOU. JUST tells us what possible FACT even remotely supports that preposterous statement. 

Need I remind you that Richard Francis said in his story that they got the first 13 hole up into the top of the “L” and then got stuck on the last five holes and that you said IN YOUR ESSAY that Hugh Wilson wasn’t even involved in this project until January 1911 and now you’re suggesting that all this happened BEFORE Nov. 15, 1910???

"THEY" were offered land and "THEY" didn't accept the over and then "THEY" negotiated for additional land in that north corner and "THEY" gave up land "THEY" didn't need and THEN Lloyd bought the property.

Who in the hell is the "THEY" you are referring to David Moriarty??   ::)
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 01:15:27 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #597 on: May 23, 2009, 01:17:04 AM »
"alsfjsa d;fje9riw0= vn=90t"

That actually makes more sense than anything else you've said on any of these Merion threads!

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #598 on: May 23, 2009, 01:26:33 AM »
"Reports say that the purchase of 338 acres was for five different plots, but I'm only counting four from this map...perhaps someone can identify the 5th."

The 5th tract was 68 acres north of College Ave.


In the beginning G_d created 338 acres from 5 different plots.  To provide one starting fact (I hope, think, conjecture, hypothesize .....) can we agree, that the 338 acres (not 330 as stated in the newspaper article, man, these guys were no better with numbers than we are) was comprised of:

Johnson Farm  140 137/1000 ac.

Dallas Estate    21 ac.

Taylor Estate    56 ac.

Davis Estate      58 ac.

Connor Estate   63 ac. (north of College, 67 ac. in 1908, but two plots totaling 4 ac. sold (speculation on my part) to Land Title and Trust Co. before 1913)

Total                338 137/1000 ac.

QED.

Mike,

In looking at your smooth curvilinear "approximate" road network are you seeing a Mae West form?   ;)


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #599 on: May 23, 2009, 01:36:43 AM »
“To All,
Is there any chance we can return to an actual factual discussion any time soon?”


I’ll certainly consider returning to a strictly factual discussion as soon as you tell us all where in the world you found a scintilla of a FACT to suggest this:

“They WERE OFFERED the land within the red lines, but they did not accept the offer because THE LAST FIVE HOLES DID NOT FIT AS THEY HAD HOPED, so they negotiated the addition of the north corner and they gave up a bunch of land they did not need to the east.    Then Lloyd bought the property.  Then they refined the plan.”

Moriarty, where in hell do you come up with complete garbage like that? I swear to GOD you are really trying people’s patience on here with that kind of total horseshit!

You harp on people on here for not supporting what they say with FACTS!?

Show us any FACT at all to suggest that preposterous statement of yours. And don’t come back with your constant accusations of people INSULTING YOU. JUST tells us what possible FACT even remotely supports that preposterous statement. 

Need I remind you that Richard Francis said in his story that they got the first 13 hole up into the top of the “L” and then got stuck on the last five holes and that you said IN YOUR ESSAY that Hugh Wilson wasn’t even involved in this project until January 1911 and now you’re suggesting that all this happened BEFORE Nov. 15, 1910???

"THEY" were offered land and "THEY" didn't accept the over and then "THEY" negotiated for additional land in that north corner and "THEY" gave up land "THEY" didn't need and THEN Lloyd bought the property.

Who in the hell is the "THEY" you are referring to David Moriarty??   ::)


That was a brief summary of part of my theory, Tom.  Mike has been misrepresenting this part of my theory, so I was reminding him what it was again.

The supporting facts have been been explained ad nauseum.   But if you have any specific questions, I'd be glad to answer them. 

I thought we were waiting for you to come up with a FACTUAL refutation.  But so far all we have are insults and righteous indignation.

When can we expect your FACTUAL refutation?  How about that FACTUAL outline?  How is that coming?  Writer's block?

_______________________

"They" is Merion Cricket Club. 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 01:40:49 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back