News:

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


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2009, 06:25:50 PM »

I have said to many parties involved that I feel strongly (based on what has been thrown out here) that it was imperative for the Merion folks to maintain a technical timeline for various reasons but that in reality there was much more going on through the summer and fall of 1910.


Henry,

Perhaps you missed the point of my comment quoted here...I don't believe for a second that Hugh Wilson was not around when CBM came in June 1910...so for what that is worth, I believe he was working on the property prior to that...even if the committee was not named until early 1911...which matches up quite well with the date Lloyd assumed the 161 acres...

I told Tom Paul and Mike Cirba a couple weeks ago that I thought a purely technical analysis of dates would never resolve this debate because too many things happen between conceiving an idea and having that idea fully implemented.

I think both sides would agree that this battle could be divided into conception and development with all of the development (construction) being attributed as it always has while the conception is where the real battle lies...and both sides agree that both CBM and Wilson/Committee deserve at least some credit for the conception of the golf course.


Ulrich Mayring

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #51 on: June 08, 2009, 06:52:32 PM »
Actually, I think that it is very likely that CBM has done a routing for Merion. Imagine what you (amateurs only now) would do if asked to look at a property? Being a fervent armchair architect, surely you would scribble something down, if only for the exercise of it. In what other way would you expect to be able to give an expert assessment about the property? You would do a visualization of some sort.

  • It would be a one day job. CBM thinks: "Hell, I'm a volunteer, that is all I have time for, considering my own course is in the works."
  • "I could always expand it to the full Monty of an NGLA-style detailed routing and construction plan, if I would actually be involved with the course."
  • We know that no less than five(!) routings were ultimately done, most likely in the same spirit.
  • We know that CBM pointed to one of the five routings. None of them could have been much more than a one day job, otherwise their study would have taken CBM a lot more time than he had.


He may have pointed to his own sketch, being the pompous ass that he was. Barker's one-day-job may have been one of the sketches. Or each member of the committee may have produced one and Wilson's got selected. We don't know what happened, because it wasn't recorded. Apparently no one thought it to be terribly important who produced the first sketch. And I can see some logic in that thinking ;D

Ulrich
Golf Course Exposé (300+ courses reviewed), Golf CV (how I keep track of 'em)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #52 on: June 08, 2009, 07:00:02 PM »
But Ulrich,

Wouldn't it be the true sign of a professional to withold his opinion (routing ideas) unless asked?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #53 on: June 08, 2009, 07:44:18 PM »
Jim,

CBM was not really a professional gca, certainly not at this time.

I agree with you on every other point. I think we forget that Wilson probably was appointed to the construction committee because he had demonstrated some interest in the new course project.  During what time period would that have been? Xmas morning 1910 when his wife gave him a ruler and paper for Christmas?  I suspect he was out there much earlier, like you do, even if not appointed to a committee. 

In fact, why would MCC appoint a construction committee until Lloyd had the property in hand in December 1910?  They wouldn't but they would be thinking about it all through the land acquistion process.

You may recall my "cornflakes and routing at breakfast theory" where I laid all that out.  I think Francis, Wilson and a few others were routing from the day CBM left the property. if for no other reason than they were as interested in golf design as many amateurs are today.  It appears they decided to use the Dallas property and also move clubhouse road east in that time frame, and IMHO, had to have done some routing work just to make sure they had acquired the RIGHT land.  The funny thing is, knowing the work that had to be done to acquire the property makes, at least in my mind, the credit that goes to the committee even MORE astounding, and yet TePaul saw it a completely different way.  In his mind, it JUST HAD TO BE LATER TO PRESERVE WILSON'S REPUTATION.  And yet, that little date has created lots of animosity!

Like everything else in the process,IMHO,  it took time.  TePaul has theorized that the timing - in November, probably saw all of the rich guys go off somewhere for Thanksgiving and Xmas.  It would be natural, and a natural break point in the work.  They came back in January and set about finalizing the details of the routing,  it would seem that the prelim routings done before Xmas looked a little odd when they came back in January.  They struggled with them, prepared 5 new ones, probably coming up with the Francis Land Swap in this time frame, and then went to see Charlie.

It was, IMHO and based on my humble experience having been involved in similar land deals, a continuous process, regardless of when the minutes say the committee was formed.   Frankly, with all the moving parts, putting together the land deal from June to Nov. 1910 is lightning speed by today's standards. 
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #54 on: June 08, 2009, 07:46:48 PM »
Actually, I think that it is very likely that CBM has done a routing for Merion. Imagine what you (amateurs only now) would do if asked to look at a property? Being a fervent armchair architect, surely you would scribble something down, if only for the exercise of it. In what other way would you expect to be able to give an expert assessment about the property? You would do a visualization of some sort.

  • It would be a one day job. CBM thinks: "Hell, I'm a volunteer, that is all I have time for, considering my own course is in the works."
  • "I could always expand it to the full Monty of an NGLA-style detailed routing and construction plan, if I would actually be involved with the course."
  • We know that no less than five(!) routings were ultimately done, most likely in the same spirit.
  • We know that CBM pointed to one of the five routings. None of them could have been much more than a one day job, otherwise their study would have taken CBM a lot more time than he had.


He may have pointed to his own sketch, being the pompous ass that he was. Barker's one-day-job may have been one of the sketches. Or each member of the committee may have produced one and Wilson's got selected. We don't know what happened, because it wasn't recorded. Apparently no one thought it to be terribly important who produced the first sketch. And I can see some logic in that thinking ;D

Ulrich

Ulrich,

But he didn't.

We know what he did in 1910.   It's clearly documented.

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #55 on: June 08, 2009, 07:49:30 PM »
Jim & Jeff & Peter,

Quit making completely logical, sensible statements.

You know...you guys are too smart.   I'm missing the wild speculation and flights of fancy here.   :-[ ;) ;D

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #56 on: June 08, 2009, 08:19:30 PM »
Sully,

Especially considering that the only single day thing Macdonald did at Merion in all of 1910 is both well documented and insubstantial.


That's not true.
You don't know the entire scope of Macdonald's activities when he was on site, including any and all subsequent communications.
You ONLY know what's in the letter

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #57 on: June 08, 2009, 08:30:50 PM »
Ulrich,

Let's see if we can get this astute tree house to agree to the following:

The routing comes prior to the individual hole/feature design/s

The question/s that no one has asked is/are as follows:

Why would you invite M&W to visit if you DIDN'T have a site picked out ?
ANSWER:  You wouldn't.

If you had a site picked out, WHY would you invite M&W to visit unless it was to help you with the routing ?
ANSWER: you wouldn't.

If you didn't have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask M&W to come look at nothing.
And, if you did have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask them to come and look at a finalized routing.

If you had a site SECURED or about to be secured you'd invite them to help you route the golf course.


Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #58 on: June 08, 2009, 08:57:46 PM »
Ulrich,

Let's see if we can get this astute tree house to agree to the following:

The routing comes prior to the individual hole/feature design/s

The question/s that no one has asked is/are as follows:

Why would you invite M&W to visit if you DIDN'T have a site picked out ?
ANSWER:  You wouldn't.

If you had a site picked out, WHY would you invite M&W to visit unless it was to help you with the routing ?
ANSWER: you wouldn't.

If you didn't have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask M&W to come look at nothing.
And, if you did have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask them to come and look at a finalized routing.

If you had a site SECURED or about to be secured you'd invite them to help you route the golf course.



Patrick,

Did you just have a conversation with yourself where you asked and answered completely hypothetical questions and then answered them with answers that were not based on a single factual piece of evidence that anyone has ever produced here in the past several years?

Damn...no wonder Tom Paul is looking to quit this site.   ::)

Just so you're not alone in this, let me try to actually converse with you.

The question/s that no one has asked is/are as follows:

Why would you invite M&W to visit if you DIDN'T have a site picked out ?
ANSWER:  They had a site picked out that they were considering and were looking for the expert opinions of M&W to 1) give them an honest assessment of the property and 2) use that reference to help them sell the plan to membership.

If you had a site picked out, WHY would you invite M&W to visit unless it was to help you with the routing ?
ANSWER: uhhh....to give you their opinion on the viability of the site for golf, and uhhh...to use that high-profile recommendation to sell the plan to membership.

If you didn't have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask M&W to come look at nothing.
And, if you did have a site SECURED or about to be secured, you wouldn't ask them to come and look at a finalized routing.

If you had a site SECURED or about to be secured you'd invite them to help you route the golf course. I'm disappointed in your inability to be objective and fact-based here, Patrick...honestly.   

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #59 on: June 08, 2009, 09:19:46 PM »
Mike and Henry,

I understand all of that, that's the point...it still doesn't tell us that CBM has done more than credited for to date without speculation.

I have said to many parties involved that I feel strongly (based on what has been thrown out here) that it was imperative for the Merion folks to maintain a technical timeline for various reasons but that in reality there was much more going on through the summer and fall of 1910.

Please note that this is not meant to discredit anyone at all, but it's tough for me to imagine CBM doing anything with them during that timeframe based on his June 29 letter which washes his hands of the immediate work...I also doubt CBM was just in town on a whim considering (this is a date I may have missed) he was hosting an innaugural event at NGLA July 1.

I think the committee needed and wanted his help in many respects, not the least being an understanding of his experience with the development package from NGLA which gives the golf course right of first refusal on a subset of land purchased with the remainder going to real estate...

Jim,

This is a really important and pivotal post in my opinion.

It seems to me that we've all sort of bought into the idea proposed in David's essay that if anything happened on the property prior to November 15, 1910 it had to be Macdonald's doing because Hugh Wilson didn't get appointed to the Construction Committee til early 1911.

Yet, that is completely preposterous, and not supported by a single fact and is in fact absolutely refuted by the most important piece of evidence produced to date...the June 29th, 1910 CB Macdonald letter in which he makes clear that he is NOT in charge, nor is he personally involved, nor is he sure that a golf course will fit, nor is he sure that the inland soil is going to work for them, and oh, by the way, the historical record show that he's got his own plate full back home at the course he's been working on for over four years that HE is trying to get opened to members back in Southamption NY!

This belief also requires acceptance of something that is totally illogical;   that Hugh Wilson was somehow kept under Plastic Wrap like the Bubble Boy until he was somehow suddenly unveiled in February 1911, AS HEAD OF A FREAKING COMMITTEE WHOSE MEMBERS INCLUDED GIANTS OF INDUSTRY LIKE H.G. LLOYD AND RODMAN GRISCOM...THE VERY LEADERS OF WHAT WAS ONE OF THE MOST RENOWNED AND PRESTIGIOUS CLUBS ON THE PLANET.

This is absolutely and certifiably INSANE.

Why in heaven's name would Merion have made him the Leader of this critical effort if they didn't have the utmost understanding and belief in him, but more importantly, why would they have kept him out of the loop as far as what they were doing on the proposed land most of 1910?!?

Why would they create a formal committee to design and build the golf course BEFORE the actual land purchase took place, which happened when Lloyd secured the property formally in December 1910?

But that doesn't mean that they weren't out there prior, almost assuredly they would have been.

We know from Joe Bausch's research that we were able to track much of Wilson's activities every year of his life...except for 1910.

We also know that AW TIllinghast bemoaned the fact that Hugh Wilson was among a few not playing in the regular tournaments that year.

Might he have been tied up elsewhere?

In the case of Barker, it doesn't appear from the July 1, 1910 letter that they even bothered to attach the routing he produced for Connell to what they sent to their Board.

In the case of Macdonald, we know exactly what he provided in 1910.    There is not a single shred of evidence that either of these men had even a single word of communications with Merion the rest of 1910.

Yet, we've all become so influenced by David's theory that we've somehow fallen victim to this thinking that the Francis Land Swap happened before November 1910, then it couldn't have been done by the Merion gang.

wow...we're pretty dumb sometimes.  Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2009, 09:35:42 PM by MCirba »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #60 on: June 08, 2009, 09:34:54 PM »
Mike,

You're pretty amazing.

It also doesn't mean CBM didn't look at the entire 340 acres and identify the creeks and quarry as the most interesting (coincidentally, it's also probably the least attractive for homes...) for golf. With the natural border of Ardmore Ave. he may have suggested a commonsensical routing around the property.  I can't count the number of times I've read your comment about how "obvious" the routing must have been...you've said this in support of Hugh Wilson (an admitted novice) being able to figure it out but dismiss the possibility of an experienced designer like CBM being able to do it in a day...

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #61 on: June 08, 2009, 09:44:00 PM »
Mike,

You're pretty amazing.

It also doesn't mean CBM didn't look at the entire 340 acres and identify the creeks and quarry as the most interesting (coincidentally, it's also probably the least attractive for homes...) for golf. With the natural border of Ardmore Ave. he may have suggested a commonsensical routing around the property.  I can't count the number of times I've read your comment about how "obvious" the routing must have been...you've said this in support of Hugh Wilson (an admitted novice) being able to figure it out but dismiss the possibility of an experienced designer like CBM being able to do it in a day...

Jim,

Is there any evidence at all that CBM did it in a day?

He was there one day in June 1910 and not again until 10 months later.

We have his letter of what took place on his first visit.

The minutes speak to what he did on his last visit.

Nowhere does anyone, ever, mention a CBM routing, design, plan, or anything remotely like that.   Not only is there no evidence to support that, much of the evidence flies directly against him doing that, including the multiple plans created by the committee as well as Alan Wilson, as well as the fact the CBM helped the committee select the best of their multiple plans.

Yes, he could have done like Barker did and sketch out something in a day, but that was not the way he worked, thank gawd!

You and I could have probably done it in a day as well.

It just likely would have sucked.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #62 on: June 08, 2009, 09:51:30 PM »
Jim,

It wouldn't hurt matters that they had the one day routing from Barker on hand.  While I don't think the record supports CBM doing a routing (it certainly didn't come back in a day with the letter) they might have all taken a look at Barker's effort and concluded quite quickly that the Dallas Estate was required to make the land south of Ardmore of any use at all.  While I doubt CBM did an entire routing, it would be easy for him (or other) to sketch in a few holes to demonstrate the possibilities if the Dallas Estate was included.

I still wonder why he was so specific about the three acres. Yes, it could have been to tie down the rr station access or just control the land around the clubhouse.  But, CBM actually says he thinks they can follow the plans they made with that 3 acres.  (Someone will provide the exact words, I am sure)  Is that a comment on the general nature of the plans, or is there something there to start with (perhaps a Wilson breakfast doodle?)

One other thing I disagreed with TePaul about, but its a minor point - CBM mentions topo maps. I suspect that Lloyd had the property topo surveyed immediately upon getting the option for both subdivision and golf design, as that would be typical for any development.

Later, property lines were put on it as determined and they became the topo maps Wilson used in his final designs, but my guess is that a good topo was available to all the day CBM visited, which would have aided discussions.

Not that this little speculative detail means much to the actual timeline of events.  Nor would that advice tip the scales of changing any attributions to the cousre.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #63 on: June 08, 2009, 09:55:56 PM »
New York, June 29, 1910
Horatio G. Lloyd, Esq.
c/o Messrs. Drexel and Co.
Philadelphia, Pa

Dear Mr. Lloyd:

Mr. Whigham and I discussed the various merits of the land you propose buying, and we think it has some very desirable features.  The quarry and the brooks can be made much of.  What it lacks in abrupt mounds can be largely rectified.

We both think that your soil will produce a firm and durable turf through the fair green quickly.  The putting greens of course will need special treatment, as the grasses are much finer.

The most difficult problem you have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage you propose buying.  So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House.  The opinon that a long course is always the best course has been exploded.  A 6000 yd. course can be made really first class, and to my mind it is more desirable than a 6300 or a 6400 yd. course, particularly where the roll of the ball will not be long, because you cannot help with the soil you have on that property having heavy turf.  Of course it would be very fast when the summer baked it well.

The following is my idea of a  6000 yard course:

One 130 yard hole
One 160    "
One 190    "
One 220 yard to 240 yard hole,
One 500 yard hole,
Six 300 to 340 yard holes,
Five 360 to 420    "
Two 440 to 480    "

As regards drainage and treatment of soil, I think it would be wise for your Committee to confer with the Baltusrol Committee.  They had a very difficult drainage problem.  You have a very simple one.  Their drainage opinions will be valuable to you.  Further, I think their soil is very similar to yours, and it might be wise to learn from them the grasses that have proved most satisfactory though the fair green.

In the meantime, it will do no harm to cut a sod or two and send it to Washington for anlaysis of the natural grasses, those indigenous to the soil.

We enjoyed our trip to Philadelphia very much, and were very pleased to meet your Committee.

With kindest regards to you all, believe me,

Yours very truly,

(signed)  Charles B. Macdonald

In soil analysis have the expert note particularly amount of carbonate of lime.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2009, 10:30:19 PM »
Mike,

Well, it does say without "a" contour map and not "your contour map" so it could be a gentle reminder to them that they need a contour map before beginning design.

I understand your point that the advice was very general in nature design wise. In fact, I think the list of hole lengths comes right out of Scotland's Gift, whether written here first and then included in the book, or taken from the draft of final print of the book.  (That's my new theory, CBM really just went to Merion to schep his new book off on a half dozen unsuspecting neophytes!)

If we take the letter as gospel (gospel according to Charlie?) we can only infer a few things - CBM was warning them of agronomy issues, he recommends 120 acres over Barkers 100 acres, and he pushes for a 6000 yard course.  Still not sure why the only specific on land he gets into is the parcel by the clubhouse, but he had his reasons.  But, I still have my sneaking suspicions that they asked him every question they could think of the days they were with him, whether or not that advice was ever formally put in a letter and that he did have influence.  I would be quite certain that he gave some verbal answers, although his response also implies that he and HJ talked at length on the train ride home.

Wilsons 2000 agronomy letters show they heeded his agronomy advice, as does the eventual purchase of 123 acres.  The clearly didn't agree with him on the course length.  Also, the final results show they clearly didn't agree with him on his artifical, linear style.  I have said before that those two things alone would be enough to declare that CB didn't have a major hand in designing the course, without the need to parse words here and there.

On the other hand, even after going against him on the 6300  yard vs 6000 yard course, they did go back to him to pick the final routing.  As I have asked before, if he picked it, is it any different than Doak picking one among several his associates have prepared? (well it is a little different, but CBM should get some credit for the routing if he was the final arbitrer, at least by today's standards)  I mean who gets the credit for Doak's routings - guys who spend weeks or months narrowing down the possibilities or Doak for having the vision to pick the best of the lot?

In the end, it is what it is - Merion spent a lot of time and work getting a world class golf course built. CBM spent only a few days that we know of, and doesn't leave a typical CBM imprint.  But, he was very, very valuble in those few days and you could argue they couldn't have done it without him.  In those days, they saw fit to credit MCC to their committee.  Now a days, we might do it differently, because of more focus on architecture, a more refined profession compared to 1910 and a host of other factors.

It is what it is.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #65 on: June 08, 2009, 10:32:46 PM »
So, I click out of this and look at today's news on MSN.com.  The headline article is titled "Jerks on Internet Forums."  I wondered if MSN is following the Merion discussion?

http://tech.msn.com/products/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=19445651&imageindex=3
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2009, 10:36:13 PM »
Nah - as passionate as this gets, it's like a convent compared to a lot of sites out there.  I asked a simple question on a BMW forum about recharging my air conditioner refrigerant and was lambasted.  No idea why...  And there are many worse than that - much, much worse.

GCA.com's discusison board is still one of the classiest boards on the web, and I'm proud to be here.


RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2009, 11:38:40 PM »
Holy cow Jeff, out of those 12 characteristics of jerkatude on net forum dwellers, I can comfortably say I got 9 of them!  At last, I'm a winner!  ;D 8)

thanks for the fun link... ;D
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #68 on: June 08, 2009, 11:52:05 PM »
I have been informed that CBM didn't publish his book until 1928 and that it was unlikely that he was taking pre-orders from the Merion folk that early.........that people are watching this so closely makes me REALLY glad I didn't post my semi attempt at humor that one "C. Banks" who played in the MCC grand opening was really Charles Banks, and playing as a stand in representative for CBM.......that timeline doesn't really work either. ::)

I also went back and looked at the Evangelist of Golf and re-read HJW obit for CBM.  Right before mentioning that MCC was one of Charlies great designs, he also mentions that he would send Seth out to do all the prelim work, and then "correct his routings."  If that is how CBM worked, I can see how old HJW would have the impression that he did the same thing with the Merion fellows and should get the credit like he always did.

I know that has been posted before, but many have probably forgotten.  :)

Yeah, other than these Merion threads, this place is pretty civil. If Shiv spends his other forum time on hockeyfights.com, I am sure HE finds this one pretty civil! ;D
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

henrye

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #69 on: June 09, 2009, 12:37:44 AM »
Jim & Mike.  I agree that logically Wilson may have been involved in 1910, but all we have to go on at this point is the documents we have been provided and in those, we have Wilson himself saying he started his work in early 1911.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #70 on: June 09, 2009, 12:53:24 AM »
It's really pretty funny that both sides demand that we only go on FACTS and can only interpret these limited documents as facts to fit their opinion...

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #71 on: June 09, 2009, 12:58:48 AM »
When going over Bahto's book I found another interesting (to me) tidbit.....

After telling Merion that the 6300  yard course is over rated, etc., CBM goes home to host an unofficial grand opening at his newly ready NGLA, which was 6100 yards in 1909, but according to George, lengthened to 6340 (Par 73) in 1911.

Was he jazzing Merion, or keeping up with the Jones after MCC opened at 63-something yards?

I have been getting a lot of private emails from all sides of this thing. I guess I have said too much.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jim Nugent

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #72 on: June 09, 2009, 02:04:46 AM »

On the other hand, even after going against him on the 6300  yard vs 6000 yard course, they did go back to him to pick the final routing.  As I have asked before, if he picked it, is it any different than Doak picking one among several his associates have prepared? (well it is a little different, but CBM should get some credit for the routing if he was the final arbitrer, at least by today's standards)  I mean who gets the credit for Doak's routings - guys who spend weeks or months narrowing down the possibilities or Doak for having the vision to pick the best of the lot?


I didn't know Tom's courses were routed that way.  Thought he did the bulk of the work himself.  Which one(s) are you thinking of? 


Mike_Cirba

Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #73 on: June 09, 2009, 06:33:32 AM »
I think ulitimately we have to rely on the guys who were there and what they said, as it's always been.

Seth Raynor was not one of them. ;)

Jeff, you'll note that I'm NOT one of the people trying to influence you behind the scenes.  ;D

I prefer to put the facts and arguments right out front.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Merion Misrepresentations: What did Alan Wilson Really Write?
« Reply #74 on: June 09, 2009, 06:50:22 AM »
When going over Bahto's book I found another interesting (to me) tidbit.....

After telling Merion that the 6300  yard course is over rated, etc., CBM goes home to host an unofficial grand opening at his newly ready NGLA, which was 6100 yards in 1909, but according to George, lengthened to 6340 (Par 73) in 1911.

Was he jazzing Merion, or keeping up with the Jones after MCC opened at 63-something yards?

I have been getting a lot of private emails from all sides of this thing. I guess I have said too much.

Jeff

If you have another look at MacDonalds letter his comments on course length is qualified by ground conditions. Am I right in saying that NGLA was intended to play fast and firm while Merion was considered unlikely to match those conditions, would that account for MacDonalds discrepancy on course length for the two courses ?

Also, with regards to course routing before the land purchase, do you really need to have a finalised routing to commit to the purchase ? Would it not be sufficient to prove that there was enough land to fit in what you wanted ? That being the case, would Barkers plan not have been sufficient to prove site was capable, even though Merion had no intention in using it ? Pure speculation on my part but interested to hear the professional view.

Niall

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back