News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Kris Shreiner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1225 on: September 01, 2010, 10:11:44 PM »
May I introduce to the GCA gang an OVER/UNDER proposition? Will this thread hit 50 pages by the Ryder Cup? ;D ??? :P!
"I said in a talk at the Dunhill Tournament in St. Andrews a few years back that I thought any of the caddies I'd had that week would probably make a good golf course architect. We all want to ask golfers of all abilities to get more out of their games -caddies do that for a living." T.Doak

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1226 on: September 01, 2010, 10:16:11 PM »
Tom,

Your feigned incredulity is only matched in intensity by your own purposeful denial of the relevant historical facts.  ;)

Everyone else on the planet besides you and David, and possibly Patrick are convinced.   

That should tell you something and it's not that you guys are correct.  ;) ;D

Kris,

Nah...I'll take the under.

If we can calm Tom Paul down a bit, I'm betting under 40.

My theory is they're faking it at this juncture...they'd HAVE to be, wouldn't they??   :-\ ::) :D
« Last Edit: September 01, 2010, 10:19:04 PM by MCirba »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1227 on: September 01, 2010, 10:18:40 PM »
I don't know what incredulity means, but my unanswered questions still stand.

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1228 on: September 01, 2010, 10:22:59 PM »
Tom,

What question do you think I haven't answered?

I'll guess.

In the spring of 1911, they were preparing the soil for the eventual planting of grass seed which occurred over half a year later.   That included turning over the soil (plowing) on all but the 25 acres they thought had adequate short grass coverage and liming the entire property.

Having a design completed at that point was not a critical path item to getting the overall land in shape for the coming golf course.

In the fall of that year, they planted grass on ALL of it but in the spring of 1911 they had to plow (less the 25 acres) and lime ALL of it.  

That needed to happen no matter where they placed the holes.

Does that answer your question?
« Last Edit: September 01, 2010, 10:46:28 PM by MCirba »

Phil_the_Author

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1229 on: September 01, 2010, 11:31:37 PM »
Tom,

Far be it for me to agree with your admitting to possibly being stupid, but your reasoning that, "I may be stupid, but Lloyd & Co. were not, and selecting an inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman to design your golf course would be the height of stupidity..." is wrong on its face.

I keep going back to a course that opened a few days after the work at Merion East began in earnest. C.C. Worthington definitely wasn't stupid and he chose an inexperienced, untested person who, unlike Wilson, had failed miserably at every business venture he tried so often that his father thought it better to simply support him while he played and wrote about golf, to design Shawnee, whose design was so good that it hosted a national championship a mere 8 years after opening.

Just as Tilly could and did design an outstanding golf course on his very first try, so too could Wilson and the rest of the Merion committee involved.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1230 on: September 01, 2010, 11:48:02 PM »
"May I introduce to the GCA gang an OVER/UNDER proposition? Will this thread hit 50 pages by the Ryder Cup?   ;) ;D :-*


Kris:

Not a bad proposition! If people keep responding to the ignoramous who posted the following I’ll take the OVER!





“Of those 73 golfers which would choose to design your golf course? Do you think Wilson's Princeton captaincy in 1901 is what convinced Lloyd he was the right man for the job?



Did Wilson request a soil analysis in preparation of routing the golf course or constructing the golf course?


I don't know what incredulity means, but my unanswered questions still stand.”

Kris Shreiner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1231 on: September 02, 2010, 12:23:56 AM »
Tommy,
Help me win the UNDER ;D ;D ;D 8)!
"I said in a talk at the Dunhill Tournament in St. Andrews a few years back that I thought any of the caddies I'd had that week would probably make a good golf course architect. We all want to ask golfers of all abilities to get more out of their games -caddies do that for a living." T.Doak

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1232 on: September 02, 2010, 12:33:50 AM »
Mike,  You and Tom Paul seem to think this is a popularity contest, and that the truth is determined by how many of your cronies you can convince.  That is not the way the truth seeking process works.  

I remind you that these same people were the ones who never would have imagined Hugh Wilson had never traveled abroad before he laid out Merion, or that the NGLA trip was not about planning Wilson's trip abroad but rather about planning Merion's course, or that M&W were integrally involved in choosing the land for Merion's course, or that Merion was originally meant to be a loss leader in a real estate scheme, or that Lloyd didn't control the land in 1909, or that HDC was originally independent of Merion, or that Merion's third hole was intended to be a redan, or that the 10th was an Alps, or any number of other things.  

You've dug in your heels at every single point, and kicked, screamed, been outraged, cussed me out, declared me a fraud, repeatedly questioned my motives, hypocritically accused me of sand-bagging, and have pretty much fought about every single point all the way along-- from years ago when I first mentioned the chronology of the legend didn't sense until just a few days ago when I told you that "laid off" was not likely a typo.  And always with a sense of righteous indignation usually reserved for right wing tele-evangelists.    And every step of the way you have been wrong.  Your beliefs in particular have been almost a perfect inverse indicator of the truth.  If you think it is true, then it isn't.

And by the way, there are plenty of people who agree with me, in all or in part.  You shouldn't assume that people agree with you just because most aren't foolish enough to risk the wrath of TEPaul or to waste their time in this absurd morass.

Plus, many of those who supposedly don't agree with me have absolutely no idea where I come down on some of this stuff.  They believe what you and TEPaul have said about my position, but neither you nor TEPaul seem to have any inkling.   That in and of itself says something about your analytical skills.

« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 12:35:49 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)

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1233 on: September 02, 2010, 06:35:57 AM »
Tom,

Far be it for me to agree with your admitting to possibly being stupid, but your reasoning that, "I may be stupid, but Lloyd & Co. were not, and selecting an inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman to design your golf course would be the height of stupidity..." is wrong on its face.

I keep going back to a course that opened a few days after the work at Merion East began in earnest. C.C. Worthington definitely wasn't stupid and he chose an inexperienced, untested person who, unlike Wilson, had failed miserably at every business venture he tried so often that his father thought it better to simply support him while he played and wrote about golf, to design Shawnee, whose design was so good that it hosted a national championship a mere 8 years after opening.

Just as Tilly could and did design an outstanding golf course on his very first try, so too could Wilson and the rest of the Merion committee involved.

Phil-the-author
Again, as I explained before, it is not the same situation. CC Worthington was neither inexperienced or untested. He had designed at least one golf course on his own, probably two, if not more. He built golf courses on both of his estates. He was also a member of the 'Apple Tree Gang' who had helped John Reid layout St. Andrews...more than a decade before I might add. He owned the Worthington Mower Co and had been around golf courses and golf course construction for several years. (Facts you completely ignored in your Tilly book).

Worthington was not stupid, but he was certainly independent and a little eccentric. Worthington was a one man show who did not answer to a membership of a club or a real estate consortium. He could do what he wanted, which included designing the Buckwood Inn. The Shawnee story has never fully been told.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 06:42:14 AM by Tom MacWood »

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1234 on: September 02, 2010, 07:26:40 AM »
David,

A "truth seeking process" relies on factual evidence, of which none exists to make the very claims you try to state as fact.   It is not wholly reliant on twisting of terms, of strained logic, and selective, inconsistent interpretations and contrived meanings as you go along.   

THAT is why your theories have not gained acceptance.   Popularity has nothing to do with it.

Are you done here?   I'm done here.   

Unless new evidence surfaces, I'm quite satisfied and I'm pretty sure everyone else is too.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1235 on: September 02, 2010, 07:43:42 AM »
Wow!

Well, that's two strikes against Tom MacWood. I wonder if he will use the same swing and actually strike out this time and show us all just how stupid he actually must be!!!   ??? ::)

Because it's been pointed out to him a couple of times already that Phil was not talking about CC Worthington being too inexperienced when Shawnee was done, he was talking about Albert W. Tillinghast being inexperienced in architecture when he did it!!!  ;)

It never really occured to me before but even if David Moriarty made what he apparently thought was the salient point in his essay that Hugh Wilson was too inexperienced to have been able to route and design Merion East in 1911 (and only knew enough to construct it  ???) and even if Tom MacWood apparently collaborated with him on that essay, I wonder if Tom MacWood has been under the impression all this time that Moriarty meant Horatio Gates Lloyd was too inexperienced to have known not to help select another guy who was too inexperienced?  ;)

"Who's on first?"

"No, he's on second."

"I didn't ask who's on second."

"You didn't? I thought you said Who's on first."
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 07:47:17 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1236 on: September 02, 2010, 07:55:06 AM »
So let's ask him.

Tom MacWood, do you think Horatio Gates Lloyd was too inexperienced to have picked a competent guy to design Merion East?

Tom MacWood:

"No, of course not. Lloyd was a smart guy because I read somewhere in an old newspaper article that Lloyd financed CC Worthington who had a successful lawn mower company so that proves Lloyd was experienced in golf architecture and knew how to pick a competent architect to design Merion East and that's why he got HH Barker to jump off a train on his way from New York to Georgia and route and design Merion East in less than a day."

Never let it be said that the world's smartest golf course architecture historical researchers and analysts aren't on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com!!

Who's on first?
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 08:01:39 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1237 on: September 02, 2010, 08:07:02 AM »
As far as continuing a discussion about the history of Merion East with David Moriarty, it looks like that won't be necessary any longer as I see on Reply #1232 he has now declared himself and his essay to be the accurate and ultimate word on Merion's history even if nobody seems to recognize that or believe it!  ;)

"Who's on first?

No, who's on second......"

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1238 on: September 02, 2010, 08:17:09 AM »

Tom MacWood, do you think Horatio Gates Lloyd was too inexperienced to have picked a competent guy to design Merion East?


Hotatio Gates Lloyd appreciated expertise and talent which is why in 1910 he chose Wilson Eyre to design his home - Allgates. You may not be familiar with Eyre, but at the time he was the premier architect in Philadelphia, and one of the top architects in the country....not unlike Barker and Macdonald in golf architecture.

...then again maybe Lloyd just liked people named Wilson.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 08:18:41 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1239 on: September 02, 2010, 08:24:18 AM »
Mike Cirba:

I think I'm done too, at least for a while. But the most amazing thing has happened about Merion's history. I just opened a couple of emails from Merion's historians and MCC's historian that came in last night. The secretary of MCC said she located an enormous wooden box that was in the top of that old historic building that has about fifty old files in it that seem to be about the entire architectural history of Merion golf club. The files run all the way from 1909 until 1942!! The box had green cord around it to which was attached a calling card on which was written September 19, 1942.

Wayne has seen enough of it to pretty much positively prove who it actually was who was responsible for all the architecture of Merion East and West because it is explained in detail who came up with the routing and the designs of over 90% of the holes on both courses.

I'll give you 4 1/2 guesses and if you don't guess who it was by then I'm going to be forced to declare you an historical architectural research/analyst idiot too!
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 09:20:44 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1240 on: September 02, 2010, 09:00:02 AM »
"Hotatio Gates Lloyd appreciated expertise and talent which is why in 1910 he chose Wilson Eyre to design his home - Allgates. You may not be familiar with Eyre, but at the time he was the premier architect in Philadelphia, and one of the top architects in the country....not unlike Barker and Macdonald in golf architecture.

...then again maybe Lloyd just liked people named Wilson."



Tom:

I like that. From now on I'm going to call him Hotatio. ;) It has a very cool ring to it (HOT-a-tio) and it captures the essence of the man and his power and vision and talent much better than Horatio, I think. It seems his closest friends called him "Terry"   ??? ::) ;) Actually, I mean that seriously.

Yes, I'm completely familiar with Allgates and its architect Wilson Eyre. A most interesting guy and some say he was considered to be one of the most prominent men in American building architecture with a reputation for a time something akin to the prominence and reputation of the great Frank Lloyd Wright later (I wonder if Frank Wright's parents gave him his middle name after Hotatio Gates Lloyd?).

Anyway, I have a bunch of books around here on the history of American building architecture and particularly the building architecture in Philadelphia and of the Main Line from 1880 to 1930. Frankly with its early building architecture in the 19th century Philadelphia had a pretty serious inferiority complex about its building architecture and its local architects and that's the primay reason so many of the large estate houses around here were done by architects from other cities, particularly New York and Boston and not necessarily Philadelphia. The one who took the brunt of that bad reputation early on and especially from the Europeans was Frank Furness who's wild muli-style applications tended to something akin to the later salvador Dali paintings. Today, however, Furness architecture is highly prized. The other big time building architecture name in this area from that era was Horace Trumbauer who had a signature style of which I am definitely not fond.

Wilson Eyre figures pretty prominently in it and most interesting for you, that shows how what comes around goes around, Eyre was actually very significant in a number of Arts and Crafts building architectural applications and one of his best and most prominent examples happens to be Horatio Gates Lloyd's Allgates. The house is still there and its a most interesting example of the English countryside stucco Arts and Crafts Style.

And of course Mrs Lloyd was the president of the Garden Club of America and the gardens of Allgates were massive and some of the most famous in America.

I'd be glad to help you out on this kind of research information if you'd like since I doubt you will ever actually see any of it. Oh well, maybe next time.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 09:12:53 AM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1241 on: September 02, 2010, 09:25:44 AM »
May I introduce to the GCA gang an OVER/UNDER proposition? Will this thread hit 50 pages by the Ryder Cup? ;D ??? :P!


Kris...to be clear, the Under has never won when these guys are involved...

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1242 on: September 02, 2010, 09:53:38 AM »
Kris:

Jim Sullivan is right---eg no Under bet was ever one when the app. half dozen regular contributors and participants on these Merion threads were active.

It looks like Mike Cirba may be winding down, at least he said he was today. Jim Sullivan seems to be too and I guess I will as well.

However, before I go, I must say I found that Post #1232 of Moriarty's very interesting and even if noone could help but see the usual disparaging tone in it, I find there are also some pretty interesting points in it as well that I would like to elaborate on with what might serve for me as a final coda on this overall subject over the years with these two guys and particularly how it culminated in that essay and the aftermath of that for us and for the club too. It occured to me that the time to end this discussion with these guys has come to an end when I noticed how Tom MacWood after apparently finding those so-called agronomy letters online began to try to interpret them. When I saw that it definitely occured to me there is no point going on with this.

I do my best thinking on the tractor so even if it may be hot as Hades here today, I'm getting on the tractor and I'm gonna mow the lower forty and do some deep thinking about all this only interrupted from time to time by the necessary careful eye to avoid some pretty serious field stones hiding under the hay. But I'm kinda like the old horse and those things are embedded in my brain in a basic grid from about fifty years of experience mowing farm fields.

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1243 on: September 02, 2010, 10:10:13 AM »
Tom MacWood,

Lloyd certainly wanted the best, which is why he and the other amateur committee members at Merion decided to do it themselves.

By 1910, the flurry of foreign professional immigrants like Barker, Campbell, the Dunns, etc. had yet to produce a single course that could be described as "first-class".  

Was that their fault?   No, of course not.   Through a combination of American club naivete (and cheapness) around what was actually required for a superb golf course, as well as over-reliance on what they saw as the expertise of the foreign pros, most of the early courses were very sub-standard in comparison to the best courses in their homelands.

At the time Merion was built, those few shining examples of excellent courses in America were all designed and developed by amateurs.   You had the course Herbert Leeds designed at Myopia, the course designed and modified by Dev Emmet and Walter Travis at Garden City, and most recently, Macdonald's superb effort at NGLA.   Related you had Fownes' efforts at Oakmont, and even at Pinehurst #2 you had Travis saying his was responsible for the "scientific trapping".  

That was it...most of the rest of the hundreds of others courses were a bit of a barren wasteland.

Each of these men knew each other from amateur competitions, and they all went abroad to study the great courses there and came back and applied those principles.  

That was the model that Merion sought to emulate, and that is why they selected the committee of their very best golfers who were highly intelligent, successful in their individual endeavors, and with the time and motivation to do it right.

Even then, they made a number of rookie mistakes.

Even though David's essay sought to glorify the routing at Merion by making no distinction to today's routing, the original was quite a bit different and changed markedly over the years.

Francis' remembrances cite some of their other mistakes, such as greens that fell away and their reliance on the road as a hazard.

The original course opened with very few bunkers...those strategies were developed by Wilson later.

Of the original course routing holes 1, 2, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 all changed markedly or wholly from the course that originally opened, and along with those, the putting greens were either relocated or wholly rebuilt on 6, 9, 14, 15, and 17 after opening.    The three fairways they thought were good enough for golf were all dug up and replanted in 1915.  

So, I think it's important that we keep in mind the historical perspective and course evolution here, Tom.  

Now, I'm satisfied that all has been presented, and I hope you are too.

Phil_the_Author

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1244 on: September 02, 2010, 10:15:13 AM »
Tom Macwood,

You make this simply too easy. You stated:

"Again, as I explained before, it is not the same situation. CC Worthington was neither inexperienced or untested..."

Again, as I explained before, it was WORTHINGTON who chose the inexperienced and untested TILLINGHAST. Why is it you cannot understand that simple thing that I have written several times? This is exactly the same situation if Merion chose Wilson.  

"He [Worthington] had designed at least one golf course on his own, probably two, if not more. He built golf courses on both of his estates..."

Have you ever seen even photographs or a layout of the 9 holes at Manwalamink his estate in Shawnee where he built that 9-hole course? It was terrible and as crude as a course built in 1899-1900 could possibly get. To call him "experienced and tested based upon this is beyond ludicrous. If he was so "experienced and tested" as you injsist, WHY WOULD HE HIRE SOMEONE WHO WASN'T TO DESIGN THE GOLF COURSE?

"He was also a member of the 'Apple Tree Gang' who had helped John Reid layout St. Andrews...more than a decade before I might add. He owned the Worthington Mower Co and had been around golf courses and golf course construction for several years. (Facts you completely ignored in your Tilly book)."

Once again, and with apologies to Simon and Garfunkel, your eyes only see what they want to see and disregard the rest. on P.52 from "Tillinghast: Creator of Golf Courses" anyone can read "C.C. Worthington, a prominent engineer, industrialist, and early member of the St. Andrew's Golf Club in New York, owned land at the Delaware Water Gap, and not just any land -- beautiful rolling hills, small mountains and islands, with large swaths of riverfront property..." So tell me, as this is a biography of Tillinghast, why is anything other than that needed to tell his story? Point of fact for you, he was FAR MORE than the owner of the Worthington Mower Co. as he had business interests and ownerships in other businesses as well; or didn't you know that? Either way, what possible reason is there to include it in a biography of TILLINGHAST? Your statement implies that I didn't and don't know about the true Worthington. You have no no idea what you are talking about on that point.

"Worthington was not stupid, but he was certainly independent and a little eccentric. Worthington was a one man show who did not answer to a membership of a club or a real estate consortium. He could do what he wanted, which included designing the Buckwood Inn.'

Really? And exactly WHAT do you base that on? Certainly NOT the early records and documents at Shawnee. You've never seen them. In fact it was only in the last 6 weeks that some amazing information was uncovered at Shawnee by the person who is in the process of writing the 100-year anniversary of the Inn and Golf Club (two separate and distinct entities by the way). This information, along with a great deal of other information that has been gathering dust in their files as well as the files of the Monroe County Historical Society which has all of the documents of the Worthington Mower Co. and which this writer has gone through, will find their spots in the book, the title of which incase you might be wondering is "Shawnee: 100 Years of a Vision Shared."

"The Shawnee story has never fully been told."

Now this statement is amazingly priceless and gratuitous. It hints at things without ever saying anything. It implies knowledge which is not known by others. Where did you get this "knowledge, Tom? From Shawnee? From the records of the Shawnee Inn? From the Shawnee Country Club records? From the Monroe County Historical Society? No, Tom, you didn't because you haven't been there. I have and have gone through every bit of all those records. Whatever you think the true "story" of Shawnee is that has never been fully told I can guarantee you that it isn't to be found in extent newspaper accounts.

Now I apologize to all on this thread as this is about Tolhurst and Merion, not Tillinghast. I wouldn't have been forced to write all of the above if Tom hadn't made his statements to myself and Mike. All of this because Tom simply can't accept that Merion wouldn't put an "inexperienced and untested insurance saleman" in charge of the design.


TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1245 on: September 02, 2010, 10:19:45 AM »
Phil:

I explained that all to him in #1235 but who knows, maybe MacWood understands red text better than dark grey text!  ;)

But Goodness, if he still doesn't figure it out don't you think out of common decency we should all chip in and raise enough money to see that he's well taken care of in a nice nursing home?  ??? :'(

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1246 on: September 02, 2010, 12:46:57 PM »
Tom Macwood,

You make this simply too easy. You stated:

"Again, as I explained before, it is not the same situation. CC Worthington was neither inexperienced or untested..."

Again, as I explained before, it was WORTHINGTON who chose the inexperienced and untested TILLINGHAST. Why is it you cannot understand that simple thing that I have written several times? This is exactly the same situation if Merion chose Wilson. 

"He [Worthington] had designed at least one golf course on his own, probably two, if not more. He built golf courses on both of his estates..."

Have you ever seen even photographs or a layout of the 9 holes at Manwalamink his estate in Shawnee where he built that 9-hole course? It was terrible and as crude as a course built in 1899-1900 could possibly get. To call him "experienced and tested based upon this is beyond ludicrous. If he was so "experienced and tested" as you injsist, WHY WOULD HE HIRE SOMEONE WHO WASN'T TO DESIGN THE GOLF COURSE?

"He was also a member of the 'Apple Tree Gang' who had helped John Reid layout St. Andrews...more than a decade before I might add. He owned the Worthington Mower Co and had been around golf courses and golf course construction for several years. (Facts you completely ignored in your Tilly book)."

Once again, and with apologies to Simon and Garfunkel, your eyes only see what they want to see and disregard the rest. on P.52 from "Tillinghast: Creator of Golf Courses" anyone can read "C.C. Worthington, a prominent engineer, industrialist, and early member of the St. Andrew's Golf Club in New York, owned land at the Delaware Water Gap, and not just any land -- beautiful rolling hills, small mountains and islands, with large swaths of riverfront property..." So tell me, as this is a biography of Tillinghast, why is anything other than that needed to tell his story? Point of fact for you, he was FAR MORE than the owner of the Worthington Mower Co. as he had business interests and ownerships in other businesses as well; or didn't you know that? Either way, what possible reason is there to include it in a biography of TILLINGHAST? Your statement implies that I didn't and don't know about the true Worthington. You have no no idea what you are talking about on that point.

"Worthington was not stupid, but he was certainly independent and a little eccentric. Worthington was a one man show who did not answer to a membership of a club or a real estate consortium. He could do what he wanted, which included designing the Buckwood Inn.'

Really? And exactly WHAT do you base that on? Certainly NOT the early records and documents at Shawnee. You've never seen them. In fact it was only in the last 6 weeks that some amazing information was uncovered at Shawnee by the person who is in the process of writing the 100-year anniversary of the Inn and Golf Club (two separate and distinct entities by the way). This information, along with a great deal of other information that has been gathering dust in their files as well as the files of the Monroe County Historical Society which has all of the documents of the Worthington Mower Co. and which this writer has gone through, will find their spots in the book, the title of which incase you might be wondering is "Shawnee: 100 Years of a Vision Shared."

"The Shawnee story has never fully been told."

Now this statement is amazingly priceless and gratuitous. It hints at things without ever saying anything. It implies knowledge which is not known by others. Where did you get this "knowledge, Tom? From Shawnee? From the records of the Shawnee Inn? From the Shawnee Country Club records? From the Monroe County Historical Society? No, Tom, you didn't because you haven't been there. I have and have gone through every bit of all those records. Whatever you think the true "story" of Shawnee is that has never been fully told I can guarantee you that it isn't to be found in extent newspaper accounts.

Now I apologize to all on this thread as this is about Tolhurst and Merion, not Tillinghast. I wouldn't have been forced to write all of the above if Tom hadn't made his statements to myself and Mike. All of this because Tom simply can't accept that Merion wouldn't put an "inexperienced and untested insurance saleman" in charge of the design.



Phil-the-author
I don't have time to correct all the errors in your last post, or in your book for that matter (that deserves its own thread or in my opinion piece), but your Shawnee comparison is not a good one for the reasons I've already given.

No I've not seen any photos of Manwalamink or his other estate course in NY. Are you saying he would have been better off hiring an experienced golf architect with clear track record of good design? Speaking of crude have you seen any early photos of Shawnee? 

Phil_the_Author

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1247 on: September 02, 2010, 12:55:09 PM »
Tom,

There are no errors in my last post other than typos. Feel free to show me any I've missed.

You asked two questions. "No I've not seen any photos of Manwalamink or his other estate course in NY. Are you saying he would have been better off hiring an experienced golf architect with clear track record of good design?" Surely you jest with this question as it ceertainly cannot be a serious one.

"Speaking of crude have you seen any early photos of Shawnee?" I have copies of every photograph published of early Shawnee and many, many that were not. It is amazing what one can find when one has access to the ACTUAL records in person.

Now it is time that YOU no longer evade but answer my series of questions asked previously. In case you forgot, here they are:

"The Shawnee story has never fully been told." Now this statement is amazingly priceless and gratuitous. It hints at things without ever saying anything. It implies knowledge which is not known by others. Where did you get this "knowledge" Tom? From Shawnee? From the records of the Shawnee Inn? From the Shawnee Country Club records? From the Monroe County Historical Society?" I bolded and underlined them so that you can't miss them...

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1248 on: September 02, 2010, 07:47:18 PM »

Are you done here?   I'm done here.   

Mike,  I was done before you yet again went on a fanciful journey covering the exact same ground you always cover.  You started this nonsense on page four, when you conveniently began hijacking the thread before it got to the meat of the errors in Tolhurst.  And it has just been the same old nonsense.   So another waste of 30+ pages on your unproductive tangents.   Where are the lawn courts? The approximate road must have been fixed! The approximate road doesn't matter! Look at how NGLA was a 110 acre course in real estate development by Walter Travis and D. Emmet, who didn't route the course until after the land was purchased!   It is silly to think a plan could exist before the course could be laid out.

The last point is particularly ironic since just a few days ago you described the Merion minutes as stating that according the the minutes, after CBM and HJW chose and approved the final plan, they stated that "if Merion would lay it out according to the plan [which M&W had] approved then the 'last seven holes would be equal to any inland course in the world.'"[/i]

That has been my contention all along, and EXACTLY what I wrote in my IMO.   Merion, particularly Hugh Wilson and his Committee, "laid the course out on the ground and built it according to plan."

They built it according to the plan chosen by CBM and HJW, the plan that CBM, HJW, Wilson, and his Committee had been working on three weeks before at NGLA. 

So I have no idea what you guys are still going on about. To deny that CBM played a major role in planning the course is ludicrous.

As for Francis Swap,  another 30+ pages and still you guys have come up with nothing which is consistent with what Francis told us, and so my THEORY is still is still the best explanation of what happened during this time period, and the only one that sticks to common sense. 

1.  In June 1910 HDC offered Merion around 100 acres to build a golf course, and they (HDC and/or Merion) had already brought in HH Barker to go over the land and draw up a preliminary layout plan.

2.  The land offered consisted of the width of the Johnson Farm Property excluding the area out all by itself West of the main property, the land West of the Haverford College Property, and possibly the narrow rectangle of land between the Dallas Estate and Ardmore Avenue.  (Depending upon whether the rectangle above the Dallas Estate is included this land measured somewhere around 101 and 108 acres.)

3. According to TEPaul, the Merion records indicate that beginning in June 1910, Merion and HDC began to clandestinely try to secure the Dallas Estate.

4.  At the end of June 1910, Merion (through Rodman Griscom) brought in CBM and HJW to inspect the property, presumably accompanied by representatives of Merion.   M&W sent a letter indicating, among other things, that a first class course may be possible on the land provided that Merion acquire the land behind the clubhouse.  They also highlighted certain features of the property such as the quarry and the streams that would be particularly valuable in laying out the course, and they provided Merion with the distances of holes which they thought would fit on the property.  All this was contingent upon them not having seen an actual contour map, which they would presumably need to tell if the course they had in mind would fit for sure.   

5.  Merion then went about trying to fit the course onto a map of the property.  (This may or may not have been the contour map that CBM needed to know for sure if his ideas for the course would fit.)   The first 13 holes fit using the land south of Ardmore and the bottom portion of land North of Ardmore, but Merion was having trouble fitting the last five holes. 

6.  Francis had an idea:  Swap the land West of the present course (where the fancy houses now sit) for land not yet on the table -- the land in the rectangle up next to the College property (the approx. 130x190 yard site of the 16th tee and 15th green.)

7.  Francis rode his bike to tell Lloyd (not Wilson) of his idea, and Lloyd agreed, and soon thereafter quarrymen blasted a place for the 16th green.

9.  Once the Dallas Deal was finally finished, Merion and HDC agree to the purchase/sale of what they believed to be 117 acres (turns out it was 120) and that land was approximated, for illustrative purposes only, on the Nov. 1910 map.

10.  On the map below . . .
---The large backwards 'L" delineated by the thick red lines approximates the land originally offered by HDC.  The small cross-hatched rectangle may or may not have been included in the offer (probably not since it would be hard to route a hole in and another out of it.)  The rectangle next to the College property at the top (the red and purple cross-hatches) was not offered either, pursuant to the Francis statement.
---The Green cross-hatches indicate the land Merion gave up in the swap.  It is the land West of the course, where the fine homes were built. 
---The Purple cross hatches indicate the land Merion gained, thus allowing them to fit the holes on paper.  This is the approx 130x190 yard area where the 15th green and 16th tee were eventually built.



Simple as that.  A
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)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #1249 on: September 02, 2010, 08:31:06 PM »
I think I agree with most of that based on what we've seen here over the last couple years...with a couple questions:

- Why do you assume CBM's recommended hole lengths were specific to Merion, as indicated in point #4?

- Assuming you're correct about the land Barker was using for his plan, how can his plan carry any weight whatsoever when the land used was so much different?