[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

In reading threads over the last several years here, I am struck by just how many articles you seem to have cataloged and at your fingertips!  Could you fill us in on how long you have been researching old courses, how much time you spend, how many articles you have, etc.

While I may not always agree with your conclusions - its pretty clear that 100 year old records are subject to a lot of interpretations - I do applaud your apparent devotion to the study of gca history. Just how much of an obsession is it?  If your interest was in a Hollywood starlet, would you be classified as a stalker?   Or have you just been at this awhile?

Apologies if this has been covered, or if you want to save answers for your day in the spotlight on "Getting to know Tom MacWood".  Of course, please fee free to pull a Tiger on me and not answer!

Thanks in advance.

[TEPaul]

Mr. Jeffrey, Sir:

Excuse me for my opinion intrusion, but do you really feel you asked the question you truly wanted to ask Tom MacWood on that initial post?  

If you don't have any or much idea what I mean by my question to you I would be happy to try to elucidate for you what I mean by it!!

[Mac Plumart]

Jeff...

I also must say that I am quite impressed with some of the information that Tom seemingly pulls out of thin air at a moments notice. 

I hope that someday I have this type of information imbedded in my noggin.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge Tom M.

[Jeff_Brauer]

My good sir Mr. Paul,

Why, whatever do you mean, good sir?  With due respect, good sir, I need no elucidation, but I do need an education in certain respects.

My question was as stated and completely pure in motives, I will have you know!  I am impressed with the sheer amount of research TMac has done, but as a "card and pencil" guy, was wondering if he could put a number to his vast collections.  (just as you can't evaluate a golf course without knowing its yardage, so to speak.)

TMac, pay no attention to Mr. Paul!  Not to be intrusive, or morbid, but in a deeper way, I wonder what plans you may have for this collection?  Are you writing a book, articles, etc.?  And God forbid, if you get hit by a hockey puck at a Blue Jackets game, does your next of kin know what all valuble stuff you have on that computer?

It seems like the makings of a valuble resource for all who are interested in gca, but as far as I can tell, it has no form.  It may just be a bunch of stuff (sorry again if I am wrong)  Is golf club atlas the best place for you to share this info?

I apologize for the stream of consciousness thinking.  But, it is uncanny how you can come up with articles almost on a moment's notice!  I have a similar skill, usually being able to come up with a bad joke on a moments notice on any topic.  Somehow, your skill seems more impressive, my good sir, and I think many of us would like to know just how the heck you do this research.

Again, apologies for any unnecessary intrusion, and thanks in advance for any enlightenment.  And, oh yeah, apologies for my good friend Mr. Paul.....such crass comments from someone so civilized!

Have a good evening in Ohio or wherever your travels have you tonight.

[DMoriarty]

Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much. 

Tom MacWood, I appreciate your research and analysis as well, but I've neither need nor desire to see a time card or a comprehensive bibliography.   Keep up the excellent work. 

[TEPaul]

Mr. Jeffrey, Sir:

As to your last post, please allow me to retract my first and only other post I put on this thread. However, my point was, if one takes Tom MacWood's Reply #25 on the North Shore thread, which is obviously a wealth of documentary and informational material input onto that thread----the real question is what exactly is his point in posting all that material on that North Shore GC thread? Does any of it have anything at all to do with the question of whether or not Tillinghast had something significant to do with North Shore GC's architecture?

Personally, I think not!

I think this guy's modus operandi on here is the more historical material you put on here, no matter how relevant or irrelevant it is, the more people will be impressed by it no matter what the point is!  

With this kind of thing I think it is important to note that Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw still claim they still hardly know how to turn on a computer!! Therefore, it is probably important to note that simply the ability to put a wealth of historical material information on here as Tom MacWood does is basically a bullshit type of currency with not much meat attached to it unless one can back it up with truly competent historical golf architecture analysis!

Does that make sense to you Mr. Jeffrey, Sir?    

 

[TEPaul]

Or, alternatively, Mr Jeffery, Sir, if you could see Michael Hurzdan's world class golf architectural library you might understand how and why Tom MacWood has the research resource he does. We've seen it and it's impressive and MH assured us Tom MacWood has read most of it and understands it better than he does by a factor of whatever.  

That is not unimpressive in anyone's book, but there you go! That's just documentary resource production. Historical golf architectural analysis is a whole different and more involved deal than just that and one will never truly understand out of Mike Hurzdan's incredibly impressive library in Columbus Ohio the fact and fabric of real GCA history, at least of some significant golf clubs and their courses! For that one needs to get intimately familiar with the clubs in question too. Unfortunately that actually requires going to them and spending a good deal of time with them and their actual histories and golf courses!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much. 

Tom MacWood, I appreciate your research and analysis as well, but I've neither need nor desire to see a time card or a comprehensive bibliography.   Keep up the excellent work. 

David,

No, I had no intention of smelling things up here, but I can see how that might happen.  I really don't want TePaul gumming up the works on this one, and/or starting a flame war.  Not my intent at all, even though I had a few disagreements with TMac on the Merion thread, specifically his contention that Barker designed Merion.  Other than that disagreement, I have no beef at all with Tom MacWood and  am truly impressed with the time he seems to put in to golf history research.

I met TMac once and had lunch. I know he does a lot of research. I read his Arts and Crafts piece and even alerted him when a well known writer pilfered it for his montly piece in a golf magazine.  As I said, maybe the "get to know" series is the place for this kind of question, but after seeing him pull articles out at will, I simply got to thinking about how he came about his "obsesion" (or hobby if you will) how long he has been at it, etc.  The stalker comment DID have a smiley face, Mr. Moriarity!  I am sorry if that attempt at humor rankles any feathers.

Am I the only one who is intrigued by the sheer volume of material TMac has collected and curious about it? 

I come in peace and hope for answers, but if Tom says, no, I understand!

Cheers to all and good night! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

My good Mr. Paul, sir,

When you arise tomorrow, I would appreciate it if you take note of my post above and lay low on this one. I have heard your theories on Tmac the researcher (or read them on other threads) and understand where you come from.  I fear the good Mr. MacWood will not answer if he smells the proverbial skunk.

If not, that is of course, his right.  But man, he sure seems to have found articles nearly every old course we discuss here! I am wondering if there is a method to his madness.  How does he pick his research topics?  I know he gets his info mostly from the internet archives, and may be the king of information collectors.  It does seem a shame that this much work might not be cared for, collated, disseminated, etc.  And maybe it is, but I am just encouraging it if it is not.

Again, a pox on both yours and the Moriarity houses should you continue to think evil thoughts!

For the last time, good night to all.....

[TEPaul]

"Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much."

If you're going to question someone on something they said why don't you at least try to question the person who actually said it instead of someone who didn't? This is so typical of your years long modus operandi on here. This kind of thing is so part and parcel of your wholly illogical essay on here----"The Missing Faces of Merion" an example with that remark above of tortured, stretched and inaccurate logic and responses!

God Forbid!

[TEPaul]

Mr Jeffrey:

Whatever you say. This is your thread so don't let me interfere---you just develop it as you see fit. If I feel the need to question where MacWood is coming from on anything I'll just start my own thread about it but don't hold your breath on that. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mr Paul, esq.,

Thanks for your understanding on this one.  I had sensed enough of a detente among the three of you that I thought I could get by with this thread celebrating the hard work of someone like TMac in an area we ALL share a passion.

I look at it this way - even if you, or "professional historians" (whatever that is) or anyone else on God's green earth may think that TMac falls short on analyzing his own collected material, his work is STILL very valuble. I think you would find that in most endeavors, the work of the pioneer isn't the finished work - it is more often a base for further work, and that is how I view TMac's endeavors at the very least! 

The quarterback never catches his own pass, am I correct?  Like sports, I think history most often takes team work of complimentary skills in research, analysis, writing, and dissemination to get a "finished" historic document out the door. 

So, even as you knock the esteemed Mr. MacWood for what he hasn' done (yet) I say that is a bit unfair.  We don't know WHAT he has planned for the future, do we?  It could be greater things, no?  Not that what he has accomplished in sheer data collection, apparently just for the lov of doing it is not great already.  I just wonder if there is a suitable way to make sure the info gets and stays in the public realm for all of us and future us' s to enjoy, use, debate, etc.

Maybe we should help him fund his own web site!  I am pretty sure he would agree to that, unless it had a "Discuss Tom MacWood" forum section that would allow the likes of us to comment. (insert frowny face here.....)

Again, for Mr. Moriarity's benefit, that last bit was an attempt at humor, which is apparently a foriegn concept to DM.

And, again, the above sentence is also a bit of humor at DM's expense, just to be clear!

And lastly, (again) Good night!

[DMoriarty]

Again, for Mr. Moriarity's benefit, that last bit was an attempt at humor, which is apparently a foriegn concept to DM.

And, again, the above sentence is also a bit of humor at DM's expense, just to be clear!

And lastly, (again) Good night!

Maybe you just aren't as funny as you think you are.

[Brian Phillips]

Well done Tom and David for spoiling yet another thread. Sort it out or get the hell off this forum, you are both starting to piss everybody off with your pathetic tiff.

It was a great question from Jeff and I would really like to hear from Tom how much work he has to put in to get his research done.

I am sick of you guys having a go at each other on here all the frigging time, grow up! You act like two children arguing over a football.

[DMoriarty]

Brian.   Jeff Brauer has let his feelings be known about TomM's research in the past, but if he has had a change of heart then great.  Although comparing TomM to a stalker isn't exactly the most productive way to express his change heart.  Tom MacWood is a valuable resource to the site and I'll continue challenge the snide comments whether or not they are followed by a smiley.  I should say I'll challenge snide comments by those other than TEPaul, for obvious reasons.  

Speaking of TomPaul, did you even bother to read any of the posts, his or mine??   If so, then what the hell are you talking about?  All I see is usual rant, but I didn't take the bait and neither did MacWood.

Maybe next time you will actually look at the posts and  direct your scorn accordingly?        

[Brian Phillips]

I did not see Jeff's question as bait but an honest question until Tom Paul started and then you jumped in as well.

[Sean_A]

For heaven's sake Moriarty, knock it on the head.  Jeff made it very clear what his motives are.  

Tom P, why are you interjecting in this thread?  It has nothing to do with you.  

The pair of you should take a long break and re-examine what you hope to accomplish with your endless childish antics because your nonsense is well and truly past its sell by date.  

I for one would like to read what Tommy Mac (remember him - the guy Jeff asked the questions of?) has to write.  He is one of the few, very few on this site, who actually researches and writes pieces based on his research.  It doesn't matter a tosh if folks agree or disagree with him.  The important aspect is the generation of interesting topics and where that leads to.  

Ciao

[DMoriarty]

I did not see Jeff's question as bait but an honest question until Tom Paul started and then you jumped in as well.

I am sure Jeff knows exactly why I found his post suspect.  I'll continue to express my thoughts to Jeff whether Tom Paul is ranting or not.  My posts had nothing to do with that.

Again next time I'd appreciate if you read my posts before you scold me.  Thanks.

[DMoriarty]

Sean

WTF?  I'm having nothing to do with him no matter his behavior.  So get off my back.

You and Brian are WAY out of line on this one and you ought to review the posts and set the record straight.  

The entirety of my posts before you two saw fit to drag me to the woodshed:

Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much.  

Tom MacWood, I appreciate your research and analysis as well, but I've neither need nor desire to see a time card or a comprehensive bibliography.   Keep up the excellent work.

And this to Jeff:

Maybe you just aren't as funny as you think you are.

That's it.

[Brian Phillips]

Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much. 

Tom MacWood, I appreciate your research and analysis as well, but I've neither need nor desire to see a time card or a comprehensive bibliography.   Keep up the excellent work. 

David,

You presumed something that you have no proof of.  I have known Jeff ever since this website started and to me his questions were honourable with a bit of humour added.  I would love to hear how Tom works as I really respect what he comes up with (I may not always agree with his final analysis).  If you have not interest in how he goes about his work, stay off the thread.  It is pretty simple, the same goes for you Tom Paul. 

You have both hijacked a thread that I am sure Tom Macwood is more than capable of defending on his own.

[DMoriarty]

  I had a sound basis for my comment.  Jeff knows that and addressed it.   

 See my posts above and compare it to your reaction.  You were and are out of line.

   

[TEPaul]

“Tom P, why are you interjecting in this thread?  It has nothing to do with you.”


Sean:

Good question and good point and that is why I posted the following last night;


“Mr Jeffrey:

Whatever you say. This is your thread so don't let me interfere---you just develop it as you see fit. If I feel the need to question where MacWood is coming from on anything I'll just start my own thread about it but don't hold your breath on that.   ”  


However, since you are expressing your opinions on this thread I'll express my opinions on yours. You said:  "It doesn't matter a tosh if folks agree or disagree with him.  The important aspect is the generation of interesting topics and where that leads to."

I agree with you on your second sentence but not on your first. I think it does matter a number of toshes if folks agree or disagree with what he or anyone else writes on this website. That's pretty much what we do on this DG and always have done----one might call it critical analysis.

[TEPaul]

Mr Jeffrey, Sir:

Perhaps on some reflection you have seen better this morining than to ask the following, humor or no humor:

"While I may not always agree with your conclusions - its pretty clear that 100 year old records are subject to a lot of interpretations - I do applaud your apparent devotion to the study of gca history. Just how much of an obsession is it?  If your interest was in a Hollywood starlet, would you be classified as a stalker?  "


If so perhaps you will consider deleting that question and I will then drop the mention of it on here, but if not I happen to think it's an interesting analogy and an interesting question that might find an answer on here from Mr. Tom MacWood. It is certainly never been much of a secret on here since he has started threads on the subject that he seems to have something of a fixation with debunking some of what he has called on here architectural "Icons" or "Legends" as well as debunking a number of their club histories about them. This is not some conjecture or speculation or accusation on my part since those particular threads begun by Mr. MacWood can still be found on the back pages of GOLFCLUBALTAS for anyone to peruse at their leisure.

Personally, I find the basic subject extremely interesting------just not the way it has been gone about on here.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I wouldn't call it a change of heart on TMac since I have always appreciated that he puts so much time into gca history.  I really meant this as a compliment to Tom Mac, and perhaps should have chosen more gracious words and less humor, and give examples of the vast majority of times when his documents really show us something new, rather than the time that I choose to disagree with him.

My reference to the obsession is a take off on an old line about golf and other hobbies that they really are obsessions, but that reference might have been a bit obtuse.

In summary, I really do appreciate TMac's work and thought many might want the backstory.  While not responsible for the thoughts and actions of others here, I am mortified that I couldn't see the consequences of this thread until after I posted it. I made the cardinal error of having a nice thought, tapping it out and hitting send before thinking it through.  For that, I apologize.

PS - I am funny and Brian is NOT out of line!

[Mac Plumart]

I vehemently stand behind Jeff...

He IS funny!!!!!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()