What's missing in this photograph? Why?

[Rick Sides]

Mike C.
I think we are right on the money.     If you carefully exam the three pictures you posted, the D.A. has not moved at all.  The shape of the green has been altered- sod has been added in places the green was once at, but the D.A. is in the same spot.  Maybe we should go on the show Mythbusters since we just disproved the "migration theory"

[Mike Cirba]

Rick,

You have to wonder how these modern urban legends get started, don't you?   

[JESII]

I think it would be instructive to overlay the image of the Red/Blue map, focussed on just the 10th hole with an aerial image of today with the back edge of the green and the line of play being the key points to line up against. I don't know how to do this, but somebody must.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I agree...that's beyond my abilities, however.

On the other hand, there are some great Photo Shop masters in here, but there is one problem...ensuring that the map and the aerial are to the same scale, which the pics I posted are not...just my close approximation.

[TEPaul]

"I think it would be instructive to overlay the image of the Red/Blue map, focussed on just the 10th hole with an aerial image of today with the back edge of the green and the line of play being the key points to line up against. I don't know how to do this, but somebody must."



Guys:

If you're gonna try to do that (which I wouldn't necessarily recommend) perhaps before you do it you should both notice and very carefully consider something potentially very revelatory about the "assets" (photograhic and maps) that we do have and already have on this thread.

Here's what I specifically mean and particularly for the few analytical duffuses on here who can't seem to understand and apparently can't admit that that DA and that little red round circle on Crump's "blue/red line" topo really are in the same location on that hole.

So take a look at all the photos of that hole----all the ones showing the DA and even the first photo that does not have it. Notice very carefully the angle or line of that right greenside bunker in all those photos and even on the copy of the so-called Colt map. Notice how the angle and line of it comes pretty much straight back in pretty much of a straight line towards the tee.

And now take a look at the same angle and line of that bunker on Crump's "blue/red line" map and notice how much the angle and line of front of that bunker angles towards the 18th hole.

Are you with me so far? If so, is there any wonder why that little red round circle looks like it's almost attached to that right side bunker on that "blue/red line" topo and particularly the app 5x to 10xs blowup of it on this thread?  

[Sean Leary]

When did the DA name first come into play? It doesn't look that severe in the '62 photo, although that might be the angle. It definitely has gotten smaller in circumference though.

[TEPaul]

Sean:

I don't believe the club or anyone else is sure either when the name of that bunker first originated or from whom. I know I've always heard from those who logically would know that it is not known.

[Mac Plumart]

Ok...

Y'all think that the DA appeared between 1913 and 1920ish, right?

I found a 1915 article that has that DA-less picture of the 10th in it. 

Then moving on to 1916, I notice that they write a lot about a problem with the greens involving too much acidity and they are "fixing" them around that time.

Still digging...will let you know if I find anything of value.

[TEPaul]

"Y'all think that the DA appeared between 1913 and 1920ish, right?"



I'd say at some point after late 1914 to some point around 1922.





"I found a 1915 article that has that DA-less picture of the 10th in it."



Mac:

That sounds like Father Simon Carr's Jan 1915 article (one of Crump's closest playing companions at PV and a Catholic priest and extremely fine golfer and holder of some impressive championships around here. He was also one of the two who wrote what I call "The Remembrances" on what Crump wanted to do with the course had he lived). That article has made the rounds on here over the years, and has been in PV's archives since the day it was printed.  



"Then moving on to 1916, I notice that they write a lot about a problem with the greens involving too much acidity and they are "fixing" them around that time."



That would be because Crump had loaded up greens and such pre-grassing in with what they described as "muck" (apparently lake and swamp bottom material that was heavily acidic). It created an agronomic failure and some real problems. The fix for that problem Alan Wilson (Hugh's brother) chronicled very well.

[Mac Plumart]

Tom...

You are right...Simon Carr 1915...with that DA-less picture attached and this description...

Jan. 1915 –

THE SHORT TENTH, 140 YARDS, AT THE NEW PINE VALLEY COURSE, SUMNER, N. J.
140 yards to the center of the green. The tee is built out on the very edge of the ridge, with the valley on the left, 50 feet below. The green is located on a knoll in the side of a huge sand hill. In the distance the green looks like an uncut emerald, as it rests amid the yellow and white sands of the surrounding bunkers. It is the jewel of the round. There is no fairway; only the roughest kind of ground along the edge of the ridge for a distance of 100 yards, and then a sudden dip down 20 feet into a small ravine, through which a road runs, 25 yards in front of the green. A topped or sclaffed tee-shot is in danger of slipping off the ridge, and bringing up in the bunkers of the eighteenth fairway in the valley below. The green is very slightly below the level of the tee, and has an upslope from front to back of three feet; so that every part of its surface is clearly in view from the tee. It is about forty feet in width, and sixty feet long, with a very irregular outline; it is entirely surrounded with bunkers. The wind always blows out on the edge of the ridge where the tee is placed; it tests one's judgment soundly to gauge this important factor accurately in playing the shot. Tee-shots at this hole are either good or bad; there is no margin for the least error. There is no secondary green, from which one may putt or chip his ball over obstacles, up to the hole-side. There is no fairway, no rough, in a word, no refuge for a nearly good shot, except the bottom of the bunkers. One must play the shot just right or fail.

Wouldn't that push the dates out to 1915-1922ish?

As always, just curious.

[TEPaul]

"Wouldn't that push the dates out to 1915-1922ish?

As always, just curious."


Mac:

Yes, unless of course that photograph was taken earlier and not for the article!

Isn't it amazing some of the things we sort of semi-automatically forget to consider? 

Are you like me who constantly flips switches to turn on the lights during a power failure when I know damn well the electricity is off? 

[TEPaul]

Mac:

Actually, that particular Simon Carr article got a ton of play on this website some years ago on some PV threads when I was arguing against the likes of Paul Turner and Tom MacWood about assigning attribution for PV between Crump and Colt.

During those interesting discussions I mentioned that that article by Carr (who again was with Crump constantly down there) which seems to attribute a lot of create for the design of the course to Harry Colt was remarkably similar in its wording to an article on the course around the same time by Walter Travis. That led me to believe Crump himself might've orchestated those articles (which were just after some of the holes first officially opened for play) to promote the place as designed by the famous architect Colt rather than himself who had never done a course before.

WELL, the screeching and gnashing of teeth over that suggestion was positively hilarious.

Nevertheless, I still believe there is a good deal of truth in it and the primary thing they forgot to consider was Crump would continue to work on designing and building and changing the course for close to three more years to come after those articles!

Ah, the undeniable benefit of a really good "timeline."  



By the way, apparently Pat Mucci doesn't even understand what a good timeline is or what it does. In his paplum-filled brain if he can't find a photogaph of some hole or feature before a certain date he figures it couldn't have existed before the photograp!   

[Mac Plumart]

Tom...on the article and the 1914 or 1915 date...here were my thoughts...correct and critique as neccessary...

The article comes out in 1915 with that picture attached and the description of the hole.  I've seen that picture in multiple places, so I assume it wasn't specifically taken for this article.  BUT, it is included...therefore, I am think the hole hasn't drastically changed since the picture was taken.  ALSO, the description of the hole doesn't specifically describe the DA bunker.  So, I conclude the time line can be bumped to 1915 rather than 1914.

In your opinion, does that hole description lead you to believe the DA bunker wasn't there in Jan. 1915?  I ask, simply because I don't know for sure.  Much like proving a negative is hard to do, concluding that something didn't exist by looking at a written description of what did exsist is difficult.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

The first order of business would seem to be locating photos/aerials that would pinpoint, within a relatively short period of time, when the DA first appeared.

The next order of business would then be to obtain photos/aerials on a quinennial basis from that point on, so that the migration and configuration changes could be studied and further narrowed down in terms of establishing time frames.

Then, once armed with the dates of origin and change, we can zoom in on who the active parties and consultants were on those dates.

I don't believe that architectural changes at PV occur randomly, except for benign tree management/neglect.

It may be that we never learn when the DA made its debut, or when and why it morphed and moved, but, it's an interesting mystery to pursue.

The same could probably be said of the "Road Hole" bunker, that too would probably be an interesting study.

I agree, there has been a lot of speculation surrounding the design and evolution of PV, the more solid evidence the better IMO.

[M. Shea Sweeney]

Has anyone taken a look at the picture of the DA in Robert Hunter's book The Links?

[TEPaul]

Good call. Even though there's no date assigned to it in The Links, I'd say that photo looks to predate the last photo on Post #77 by a year, maybe two.

[Patrick_Mucci]

What's been lost, architecturally, in this discussion, due to the sole focus on the D.A. bunker, is the way the fronting bank and front of the green have changed over the years.

Look at the original photo on this thread and then look at the successive photos and how much the fronting bank and front of the green have changed over the years.

One cannot have a thorough discussion of the D.A. without including the morphing of the front bank as it appears below.

[Tom MacWood]

Here is the picture that appears in The Links (1926).

[TEPaul]

"What's been lost, architecturally, in this discussion, due to the sole focus on the D.A. bunker, is the way the fronting bank and front of the green have changed over the years."


A PV timeline:

As the progression of photos we have show us, various areas on the course (best examples being the fronting bunkers on #2 and #18) were in a fair state of natural physical evolution or perhaps more appropriately devolution. The fronting bunker on #10 is a pretty good example of it.

And to plug an architectural timeline into the progression it should be noted that after Crump died suddenly in Jan. 1918 there were still only fourteen holes open to play. #12-#15 were in some state of construction and development at that time but it is pretty hard to say what that degree of construction and development was at that time other than they were not ready for play and not grassed.

When Crump died suddenly the club was somewhat unsure how to proceed with the finishing off of the course and of course Crump's own construction money was not available as he was gone. Construction was also at a standstill until the WW1 armstice in Nov. 1918. America had been at war for nineteen months during which time very little if any construction work had been done at Pine Valley (May, 1917 to Nov. 1918).

In early 1919 a $20,000 gift was provided by member Grinnell Willis to complete and put into play holes #12-#15. Club records and club histories indicate Hugh and Alan Wilson were tapped by the board to complete those holes which they spent 4-6 months working on. Hugh Wilson would be appointed PV's green chairman.

Documentary material from a source other than the club indicate that it was William Flynn who was given the assignement (by the Wilsons) in 1919 to complete those final four holes (12-15) which he did in collaboration with foreman (and pro/clubmaker/greenskeeper) Jim Govan who had been Crump's foreman and constant on-course companion and shot-tester from March 1914. Flynn actually went on the PV payroll and his mailing address was Pine Valley. It looks like he was at it with Pine Valley for about six months through the spring and summer of 1919.

The last four holes were grassed in the early fall of 1919 and brought into play in the summer of 1920 which finally opened up the entire eighteen for the first time.

[TEPaul]

"One cannot have a thorough discussion of the D.A. without including the morphing of the front bank as it appears below."


The best and perhaps only good way to track the evolution of the course or any hole or any feature is to line up side by side the available progression of documentary material, particularly photographs in chronological order and try to date all the assets if they aren't and create as exact a progression timeline as possible (John Ott and I used to do this on his diningroom table with the approximate 21 available aerials from the Dallin aerial collection).

Much of that photographic material showed up in newspapers and magazines and some prominent golf architecture books such as Hunter's "The Links" and Thomas's "Golf Architecture in America," and of course in the club's three history books. However, not all the available photographs are extant in those books and periodicals. It appears there are some other photographs in the archives and many of them actually hang on the club walls including the rooms in Dormie House.

With all the available material, arranging it into a progression timeline and analyzing all the details would yield, in my opinion, a pretty exact architectural creation story of the course, its individual holes and even their features from the beginning (Oct. 1912) to the final opening of all eighteen holes (mid-1920). Of course, at least personally, I believe the architectural creation story should be taken probably to 1923 at least (or through Maxwell's work into the late 1920s or early 1930s) as that would encompass the important architectural work done to the course by the so-called "1921 Advisory Committee." The timing is getting right as well as PV is coming up on its centennial (incorporation) in 2013.

Will the origins of the DA ever be known? Who knows until everything extant is assembled and carefully analyzed. It has been analyzed to some good degree in the three PV history books but it seems there is still much in the way of detail that can and probably will be revealed in perhaps a far more careful analysis.

BTW, the photograph of the 10th in Hunter's book (Post #317) apparently came from the collection of a seemingly prolific photographer by the name of Walter Harriman Savory.

[JESII]

Thanks Tom, that is helpful...to me anyway.


What makes you say there looks to be a year or so difference between the two pictures with the DA? The one Tom just posted looks to have significantly less scrub around the ground and even the trees seem a little thinner.

[TEPaul]

That's one of the reasons I think the one in The Links may be bit older than the last one on #77. How do I try to tell earlier/later or try to assign an app. date? I have a whole bunch of what might be called evolutionary "keys" on these holes. Obviously the easiest is to just compare the same tree(s) or bush(es) between the photos. Unfortunately not all the photos show the most important of those "keys."

[Joe Bausch]

Mike Cirba asked me to post this photo he was sent by a fellow GCAer of the 10th, pre-DA.  This is from the Strohmeyer photos.

I've posted it wider than 800 pixels wide as I think it is warranted.

[Bradley Anderson]

Joe,

Thanks for posting that. I found this clipping yesterday evening. The perspective that I am getting from this broad view of the entire hole, before the pines have grown up, is very interesting:

It looks to me like there was a lot of earth moving in this section of the course. Look at how much fill is going in to the adjacent tee!

Does anyone know what those sand mounds are in back of the green? Those are curious. Are those stock piles?

Can you imagine how hard this shot was back in those days?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe,

In what publication did this photo appear ?

Any chance at dating it ?