Was Charles Blair Macdonald really the father of Golf Architecture in America

[TEPaul]

"As always, I remain ready for a fact based discussion.

As always, you fail to produce any facts that support your point."


Moriarty:

YOU remain ready for a fact based discussion? No you don't because in this particular case it's all about what YOU said about Macdonald six years ago and in the interim have been accusing Wayne Morrison and me of saying about Macdonald----trying to downplay Macdonald and his contribution to American golf architecture, as an arrogant man and arrogant approach to architecture etc.

I've failed to produce any facts to support my point? Oh no I haven't; my point was simply you said what you've been accusing us of saying about Macdonald which we never said at all. I just reprised an entire five page thread ("Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark" with The Lido?"0 that is chocked full of a litany of posts from you saying exactly the same thing about Macdonald that you've accused us of saying. It is all there in black and white text for all to read and see.  

You can't deny it now, Moriarty, and you can't weasel out of it by rationalizing it away with your ridiculous specious remarks. IT's ALL there for everyone to read and to see what a massive hypocrite you truly are. I suppose you could delete it or alter it but we will all see that you did that and tried to weasel out of it that way.

From time to time you have complained on here that you are worried about your reputation due to what many have said to you and about you on this website. You should be worried about your reputation----there is so much you have done and said on here that you should be worried about----and that old thread points out in spades that one of the things you should be truly worried about is being perceived as a real hypocrite.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

No problem; I won't ask you again to get involved in this USGA Architecture Archive effort. If you have friends in the USGA, as you say you have, this is something you should have offered to get involved in yourself a long time ago but you never did. I think it says a ton about where you're really coming from on this entire subject of the history of golf architecture. The fact seems to be you're in this just for yourself. Pretty selfish and self-centered I'd say. Don't worry, I won't contact you again in any way.

[DMoriarty]

"As always, I remain ready for a fact based discussion.

As always, you fail to produce any facts that support your point."


Moriarty:

YOU remain ready for a fact based discussion? No you don't because in this particular case it's all about what YOU said about Macdonald six years ago and in the interim have been accusing Wayne Morrison and I of saying about Macdonald----trying to downplay Macdonald and his contribution to American golf architecture, as an arrogant man and approach to architecture etc.

I've failed to produce any facts to support my point? Oh no I haven't I just reprised an entire five page thread ("Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark" with The Lido?" that is chock full of a litany of posts from you saying exactly the same thing about Macdonald that you've accused us of saying. It is all there in black and white text for all to see.  

You can't deny it now, Moriarty, and you can't weasel out of it by rationalizing it away with your ridiculous specious remarks. IT's all there for everyone to read and to see what a massive hypocrite you truly are.

________________________________________________________

As I figured, this was not an attempt at a legitimate discussion, but instead just the latest lame attempt at "gotcha," where you and Wayne (who knows if you even know how to use the search function) desperately go through these convoluted exercises just to try and make some inane point that has absolutely no relevance to any real topic whatsoever.  Pulling up a 6 year old thread where I argued that CBM was arrogant for taking on the Lido project?   So what.   I still believe it.  I haven't denied anything or tried to weasel out of anything.   That Lido thread could have been a very productive, but if I recall correctly you ruined that one as well.  

Anyway, I explained my basis for the opinion I expressed in that thread.  In contrast, you and Wayne still have never backed up your gossip about CBM and his approach, or offered factual support for your repeated claim that his "arrogance" adversely impacted his work.    

Every day you surprise me with just how unstable you have become.  

__________________________________________________________________________________________

TomM,

I figured as much, but too bad you too are on TEPaul's hate-mail list.   Yet more evidence that this guy is too creepy to deal with, yet too creepy to ignore.   Do you suppose he has illicit photos of Ran and Ben?  Otherwise why would they let a sleazy nut-job like this roam their site, harassing whomever dares cross him?  

Do you suppose TEPaul even sees the irony in his taking umbrage about you ignoring what he writes on behalf of the USGA?   Did he forget already that in the past he has sent you messages containing bald-faced lies about what various officials at the USGA had supposedly said about you?  

Personally,  I find it impossible to take the USGA seriously if they'd let either Wayne or TEPaul play any sort of role in anything remotely important.   Never mind them repeatedly lying about and concealing important source information, imagine the USGA giving charge to the guy who, we've been told for years, pissed on the graves of some of the most important men in the history of golf and golf course design in America.  And giving equal charge to his sidekick who celebrated and joked about the event (real or not) for years!   Of course now they claim it never happened, but to me that is just as bad.   What kind of creeps make up a story like this and run with it?  

[TEPaul]

Moriarty:

There is just no having any discussion or conversation on this website with you, no matter what I do or how hard I try. I can't and the list is really long of others who couldn't, and others who had so much more to offer this place than you ever could have even if you remotely tried to cooperate with anyone which it seems you never have. I suppose you just don't know how to. I don't think anyone on this website really can have a decent discussion or conversation with you or not for long. You have pretty much fucked up GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and all on your own and that is a very remarkable prospect to consider, for sure.

Wayne Morrison is a very good friend, a good and cooperative guy in this thing we all love, and he is extremely productive at it, something I doubt you could ever hope to be the way you're going. He just sent me a few messages sort of pleading with me to get off this site because of you primarily. He thinks trying to do anything on here so long as you're on here is a complete waste of time and he basically just cannot understand why most all the others on here don't just stand up and demand that you be completely dismissed and permanently. I think Wayne is right, and I guess I always have.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Neither victimhood nor sanctimony suit you tom, so why don't you give 'em a rest. 

For every accusation you make against those who don't agree with you there is an accusation they can make against you.

No one will ever 'win', period.

[DMoriarty]

Moriarty:

There is just no having any discussion or conversation on this website with you, no matter what I do or how hard I try. I can't and the list is really long of others who couldn't, and others who had so much more to offer this place than you ever could have even if you remotely tried to cooperate with anyone which it seems you never have. I suppose you just don't know how to. I don't think anyone on this website really can have a decent discussion or conversation with you or not for long. You have pretty much fucked up GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and all on your own and that is a very remarkable prospect to consider, for sure.

You suggested we have a conversation.  I told you to show your cards.  Your response was to pull up a six year old post of mine and try to twist it with all your might.  Yet I am the one who cannot have a conversation?   Interesting.    

At this point, Tom, I want you to leave me alone, and I want you to leave alone everyone else you try to hassle or bully.  Surely you realize by now that I will not be bullied or browbeat I away from discussing things that interest me, by you or anyone else.  

Wayne Morrison is a very good friend, a good and cooperative guy in this thing we all love, and he is extremely productive at it, something I doubt you could ever hope to be the way you're going. He just sent me a few message sort of pleading with me to get off this site because of you primarily. He basically just cannot understand why most all the others on here don't just stand up and demand that you be completely dismissed and permanently. I think Wayne is right, and I guess I always have.

Tom,  Any grief caused you or Wayne is purely of your own doing.  I'm not the one who is hiding the source material from one of America's greatest courses and suppressing its real history, while at the same time pretending to be acting in the best interests of the club and the USGA.  I'm not the one who wrote for years about how you and another witnessed Wayne desecrate the graves of CB Macdonald, Seth Raynor, and try to desecrate the grave of H.J. Whigham (all at the Southampton Cemetery in the early fall of 2006.)  I am not the one who claims there was even a photo of it.   (Will that photo be in the USGA archives?)    I am not the one who has lied and misrepresented the words and intentions of various officials at the USGA and certain clubs.   I am not the one who has sworn vendettas against those who are merely interested in understanding the history of golf design.   The list goes on, but you get the picture.  

This is no place for anyone who wants his opinion accepted by decree rather than persuasion, and Wayne didn't want his pet theories and projects exposed to the light of day, and he found it impossible back up his claims with verifiable facts, so he left.   While the same applies to you, I don't give a damn if you stay or go, but leave me the hell alone.

[TEPaul]

"You suggested we have a conversation.  I told you to show your cards.  Your response was to pull up a six year old post of mine and try to twist it with all your might.  Yet I am the one who cannot have a conversation?   Interesting."


What do you mean I tried to twist it?

It's just there in textual black and white from six years ago. You said what you said back then and so did I, so let's go, let's use it as it was and is, OK?; let's discuss it. Do you have a problem with that?

I don't.

[DMoriarty]

Are you serious?   One minute you are posturing to get me kicked off the website and threatening that one of us must go, and the next minute you want to discuss a post I wrote six years ago about a course we aren't even discussing?   You are up and down like a toilet seat at a mixed party.  

I explained myself repeatedly in that thread.   Read it if you'd like, but I have no interest in rehashing it.  

As I said above, if you ever bother to make your case regarding CBM's supposed shortcomings, then I'll consider it so long as you actually rely on facts as opposed to the gossip we have gotten so far.

We've got nothing to talk about unless and until you actually figure out how to start backing up your many questionable opinions with relevant fact, and can do so without being so insufferably rude and creepy.  
  

[Tom MacWood]

As for Ekwanok and Travis, I checked with Bob Labbance's associate who said he thinks the mention of Travis co-designing with John Duncan Dunn in the fall of 1899 comes from the club's history that includes hotel records and such.

TEP
I have the club history and there is no mention of hotel records and such. There is a very good reason why Travis himself never took credit for the design.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
I have the club history and there is no mention of hotel records and such."

Tom MacWood:

Well then when it comes to the mention of the hospitality of the Equinox Hotel in Sept/Oct, 1899 in Bob Labbance's biography of Walter Travis, I guess you just assume he made it up.

I don't.

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
I have the club history and there is no mention of hotel records and such."

Tom MacWood:

Well then when it comes to the mention of the hospitality of the Equinox Hotel in Sept/Oct, 1899 in Bob Labbance's biography of Walter Travis, I guess you just assume he made it up.

I don't.

TEP
If he had the hotel records wouldn't he've been more specific about the date or dates? Doesn't Sept/Oct 1899 seem a bit vague to you? By the way Travis's golfing activities are well documented during that time, he played in several events around NY in September and October (Lake Saranac event, Westbrook event, US v Canada at Morris County, Metropolitan Open at Nassau) and also played in the US Open in Baltimore in mid-September. There is no record of him playing at Manchester in September or October 1899.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

I realize Travis' golfing activities in the fall of 1899 are well documented. Matter of fact, Jim Kennedy listed them on this thread. Does that mean to you that he could not have been at Ekwanok when he was not elsewhere playing golf?


"If he had the hotel records wouldn't he've been more specific about the date or dates?"


Not necessarily. Bob Labbance was writing a biography of Travis and I'm not sure the exact dates when Travis stayed at the Equinox Hotel is that necessary or interesting to anyone other than perhaps you, at this point, because you are always trying to find mistakes in club histories and biographies and such, and that kind of question above is one of your techniques. As I said, I very much doubt Bob Labbance just made up that part about Travis enjoying the hospitality of the Equinox Hotel but apparently you think he did.

Again, I don't.

[TEPaul]

Jim Kennedy:

Allow me to ask you something: Here is something Moriarty said on this thread:



“The old, tired, CBM-the-Arrogant-Ogre claim; perhaps the most overplayed and undersupported claim in the history of gca.com.   You and Wayne have been gossiping about this for years, yet as far as I know you have yet to even bother to try and make the case.  So I file it with the Whigham-the-Lackey and Emmet-the-Homosexual gossip, under "U" for Unproductive and Unsupported.

If you think you can make the case that CBM was "'arrogant' in the way he approached and applied golf course architecture in his career," go for it.  But instead of rehashing the same old gossip and innuendo, how about you try it with verifiable facts?  Skip the unsupported and irrelevant gossip about who commissioned his statue, or the vague, out of context references to a letter or two.  Give us VERIFIABLE FACTS which support your claim that CBM was arrogant in the way he approached and applied golf course architecture.”




And now here is something he said on a thread six years ago (to you and me actually ).


“ I also said that attempting the Lido was an act of arrogance on the part of the MacDonald, but I am certainly not the first to call C.B. arrogant, am I?  Any time an architect takes on a project for the thrill of becoming a "creator" and starts trying to match Nature bump for bump, I think it is fair to call them arrogant.  And by the way, I think what C.B. tried to do at NGLA was arrogant also (for different reasons), even though he pulled it off.

     I think that this is a large part of the misunderstanding.  You guys mistake looking critically at one of the guy's projects with some sort of personal attack aimed at dimishing his greatness.   If we cant look critically at these guys' methods and approaches, then what the heck are we doing hanging around this website?”



So let me ask you Jim, don’t you see anything peculiar about his approach to this very same subject on this thread including his accusation that Wayne and I are the ones responsible for this CBM-the-Arrogant-Ogre claim? Do you see anything hypocritical in the way he is acting now and what he is saying now in comparison to what he said six years ago on that thread I just reprised?

I should also point out to you Jim, if you read that old thread and this one on the subject of some arrogance on the part of CBM, you, at least, have been remarkably consistent over the years. It does not appear that you have changed your opinion on that particular subject but Moriarty certainly has and the fact that he refused to admit it or address it now and even tries to deny it and even blame that claim on Wayne and me shows me a pretty high degree of hypocrisy on his part.


I don't like that kind of hypocrisy and I know you don't either; therefore I see no reason why you should respond to him any differently on this thread than you did on that one "Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark' with The Lido?" six years ago.

[Tom MacWood]

Not necessarily. Bob Labbance was writing a biography of Travis and I'm not sure the exact dates when Travis stayed at the Equinox Hotel is that necessary or interesting to anyone other than perhaps you, at this point, because you are always trying to find mistakes in club histories and biographies and such, and that kind of question above is one of your techniques. As I said, I very much doubt Bob Labbance just made up that part about Travis enjoying the hospitality of the Equinox Hotel but apparently you think he did.

Again, I don't.

TEP
When writing a history (of any kind) the more precisely you can date an event the better. I don't go looking for mistakes (that would be a huge waste of time), I stumble upon revelations in the process of researching early American and British golf architecture. If you had ever conducted any research you'd probably know how the process works.

[TEPaul]

"When writing a history (of any kind) the more precisely you can date an event the better. I don't go looking for mistakes (that would be a huge waste of time), I stumble upon revelations in the process of researching early American and British golf architecture. If you had ever conducted any research you'd probably know how the process works."


Tom MacWood:

No question about it that precise dates are valuable or accurate dating in any case. That's why I put so much value in "timelining" for an accurate historical analysis such as the one with the creation years of Pine Valley, and perhaps even what CBM knew or didn't know abroad before 1902. I don't exactly go looking for mistakes either but certainly have come across some interesting ones, and mostly wholly accidental ones, of real significance and I am pretty intuitive about finding them through "Timelining." I do know how the process works despite your last remark which has gotten to be something akin to a broken record on here. You've said for years on here C&W is all I know while you know very well that's not remotely true as you also know very well why you keep saying something like that on here.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
If Bob L. had the hotel records and the precise dates of Travis's visit (as you suggest) why would he present such vague time frame (Sept/Oct)? Does that make any sense?

[Rich Goodale]

Maybe he checked in on Sep. 30th and checked out Oct. 1?

[Tom MacWood]

...or checked in on Sept 1 and checked out Oct 31.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tom,

I agree with David on this thread because he's mainly sticking to facts with some conjecture, I disagreed with most of his points on that other thread and I still do.

I agreed with you on various points on that other thread and I still do, on this thread I think you're more willing to forgo a reasonable interpretation of what facts are known in favor of conjecture.

What I notice on that other thread is a lack of any real confrontation between anyone, even though there were disagreements. Nowadays  I see more confrontations, and they're not between David, Tom Mac, or myself even though we regularly disagree.

That's not a judgement, only an observation.         

[DMoriarty]

So let me ask you Jim, don’t you see anything peculiar about his approach to this very same subject on this thread including his accusation that Wayne and I are the ones responsible for this CBM-the-Arrogant-Ogre claim? Do you see anything hypocritical in the way he is acting now and what he is saying now in comparison to what he said six years ago on that thread I just reprised?

I should also point out to you Jim, if you read that old thread and this one on the subject of some arrogance on the part of CBM, you, at least, have been remarkably consistent over the years. It does not appear that you have changed your opinion on that particular subject but Moriarty certainly has and the fact that he refused to admit it or address it now and even tries to deny it and even blame that claim on Wayne and me shows me a pretty high degree of hypocrisy on his part.

I don't like that kind of hypocrisy and I know you don't either; therefore I see no reason why you should respond to him any differently on this thread than you did on that one "Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark' with The Lido?" six years ago.

Is this really all you have left Tom?   Desperately begging other posters to take up arguments against me that have been fallow for 6 years?  

Unlike you, I don't go into every discussion with some pre-ordained legend to protect or predefined point to make.   I follow the facts where they lead me, and the facts have lead me to change my views on CBM significantly over the past six years.   As I said above, I still believe much of what I wrote in that old thread, but would put it differently today.   I welcome disagreement from Jim or anyone else, so long as they disagree without being a complete jerk.

And Tom, there is nothing hypocritical going on on my side   You and Wayne obviously think that CBM was arrogant, but that has never been the problem.  Rather, my problem with you guys is that you trash him with rumor, gossip, innuendo, and caricature, but you never bother to try to make your case with actual fact and analysis.   Six years ago I set out the basis  for my claim for all to see and challenge.  In contrast you and Wayne stick to petty, small minded gossip, trying to trash the CBM's eputation indirectly, without ever bothering to back any of it up.

Make your case or let it go.   

[TEPaul]

"Unlike you, I don't go into every discussion with some pre-ordained legend to protect or predefined point to make.   I follow the facts where they lead me, and the facts have lead me to change my views on CBM significantly over the past six years.   As I said above, I still believe much of what I wrote in that old thread, but would put it differently today.   I welcome disagreement from Jim or anyone else, so long as they disagree without being a complete jerk.

And Tom, there is nothing hypocritical going on on my side   You and Wayne obviously think that CBM was arrogant, but that has never been the problem.  Rather, my problem with you guys is that you trash him with rumor, gossip, innuendo, and caricature, but you never bother to try to make your case with actual fact and analysis.   Six years ago I set out the basis  for my claim for all to see and challenge.  In contrast you and Wayne stick to petty, small minded gossip, trying to trash the CBM's eputation indirectly, without ever bothering to back any of it up.

Make your case or let it go."


Moriarty:

If you changed your mind about CBM or his arrogance in approaching or applying golf course architecture, that is just fine with me---that's very cool with me, actually. I think as we live and learn we sure can and do change our perspectives and opinions about golf architecture and its architects, including CBM.

I've always thought he was arrogant with his approach, application, and the way he dealt with the world he lived in and that has always been fascinating to me---totally fascinating.

My problem with you is you said he was arrogant back in 2003 and in the interim you have been accusing Wayne and me of saying that first on here about Charles Blair Macdonald, but we never did. You've been saying we have but the fact is WE NEVER DID! I just proved that with that 2003 thread ("Re; Did Macdonald "Jump the Shark' with the Lido") you started YOU were the one who said that first, claimed that first and maintained it first and the fact you find it impossible to admit it to now and even deny on this thread is just about the height of hypocricy on your part, in my opinion!

If you think Wayne or me said Macdonald was some kind of arrogant ogre before you did with that thread or yours back in 2003  just show us all where we said that before you did. I've asked you to show us all that and the fact is you just completely avoid it? Why is that? In my book, it's totally obvious and shows you to be the hypocritical twit you are and always have been on this website!! You're the dude who asks for facts, right?? Well then, you weasel, show us the facts where we said that before you did on your 2003 thread (Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark" with The Lido?").

My bet is you can't do that or won't do that which shows totally loud and clear the complete hypocite you are and always have been on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

Let's see you prove me wrong about that, Moriarty. My bet is you can't and all we will see is more of your tranparent attempts at argumentative deception!

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Whatever you say.

[DMoriarty]

My problem with you is you said he was arrogant back in 2003 and in the interim you have been accusing Wayne and me of saying that first on here about Charles Blair Macdonald, but we never did. You've been saying we have but the fact is WE NEVER DID! I just proved that with that 2003 thread ("Re; Did Macdonald "Jump the Shark' with the Lido") you started YOU were the one who said that first, claimed that first and maintained it first and the fact you find it impossible to admit it to now and even deny on this thread is just about the height of hypocricy on your part, in my opinion!

If you think Wayne or me said Macdonald was some kind of arrogant ogre before you did with that thread or yours back in 2003  just show us all where we said that before you did. I've asked you to show us all that and the fact is you just completely avoid it? Why is that? In my book, it's totally obvious and shows you to be the hypocritical twit you are and always have been on this website!! You're the dude who asks for facts, right?? Well then, you weasel, show us the facts where we said that before you did on your 2003 thread (Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark" with The Lido?").

My bet is you can't do that or won't do that which shows totally loud and clear the complete hypocite you are and always have been on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

Let's see you prove me wrong about that, Moriarty. My bet is you can't and all we will see is more of your tranparent attempts at argumentative deception!

Is this a joke?   

Are you seriously contending that you and Wayne have never said that CBM was arrogant, that he was an egomaniac, that his personality interfered with his designs?  Do you really believe that you guys haven't incessantly mocked him and portrayed him as a temperamental self-worshiping asshole who listened to no one and only gave a damn about himself?  Do you really think I cannot come up with examples of you guys portraying him as an egomaniac? You were cc'd on Wayne's recent email to me, weren't you?

Probably not a joke, so it must be your latest bizarre game.  Obviously you've set it up so the result is dependent upon a bizarre and irrational condition:  Who used the word "arrogant" first?   Sorry, but I won't play.  I never wrote that you guys portrayed him as an arrogant ogre first.  I wrote your presentation of him as an arrogant ogre is old and tired, and has been overplayed and unsupported for years.  I stand by that.

And for the record, I have never portrayed CBM the way you guys portray him.  Lumping me in with you guys is absurd.

[TEPaul]

"Are you seriously contending that you and Wayne have never said that CBM was arrogant, that he was an egomaniac, that his personality interfered with his designs?"


Moriarty:

No, I've never contended on here that I've never said CBM was arrogant or some type of egomaniac. I think anyone who's studied the man admits that and so do I. I have said many times on here though that that really does fascinate me. I've also said many times that I think that aspect is a very good one for a good discussion on here. I would hope you would participate in it but you seem to only want to deflect the whole thing with posts similar to the ones you've made in the last few days. As to what you said about his personality interfering with his designs I have no idea what you mean by that unless it is some implication to some other personal problems he had that were referred to in some old letters from others who knew him.

What bothers me about you is you're now contending that Wayne and I were the ones who first claimed on here CBM was an arrogant man but I have shown it was you who did that on that six year old thread of yours "Re: Did Macdonald 'Jump the Shark' with The Lido?" Part of the point you were making on that thread of yours was that he was an arrogant man to have taken on a project like The Lido so as to practically play God or the Creator with a particular site and you even said you felt he was arrogant to have done NGLA. You tried to make the point that his arrogance with that project (The Lido) may've even destroyed the Golden Age of architecture and ushered in the beginning of some modern age of architecture where the land itself was not particularly respected or used to lead the roll of golf course architecture. Frankly, and in my opinion, that point really is a pretty interesting one to make and consider whether it was actually true or not.

I just think you need to admit that and stopped trying to blame Wayne and I for first claiming that on here. If you can't or don't admit it I think that shows some real hypocrisy on your part and obviously I don't think that's appropriate and certainly not at the expense of Wayne Morrison and I.

So, no, what I'm trying to say to you is not a joke at all; it is very serious, and I'm serious about it! You should be too.

[TEPaul]

"You were cc'd on Wayne's recent email to me, weren't you?"


Yes I was and I thought it was a most thoughtful and helpful message to you about this very subject. I think it's too bad you ignored it and failed to respond to him. I think a copy went to Tom MacWood too and he failed to respond as well. That's too bad, as a resolution was certainly in the offing with that message of Wayne's.