[Tom MacWood]

Phil:


Your Post #170 is a good one and an important one----eg that you call on MacWood to provide "facts" to support his claims (or "INOs"   ) if he is going to ask Cirba to do the same.

However, I don't see that it has ever been MacWood who has ever called on anyone on here to provide "facts" to support what they say. It is Moriarty who has been doing that, not MacWood. Of course Moriarty has provided no "facts" or "PHACTS" at all or whatever else he calls them on here while calling on others to provide them or else be considered "assinine," "ignorant," or "PHUCKING jokers."

Moriarty has apparently always viewed this website and DG as something akin to a court of law and not an opinion entity for discussion purposes. He provides no facts himself while always calling on others to provide facts. That at least is misguided and at most is just hypocrisy.

The truth is with Moriarty his MO is to just throw some undocumented bullshit opinions, assumptions, premises and conclusions of his own on the wall and when others refute them and criticize him for them he responds by demanding from others that they must provide him with facts to refute the horsehit he produces. I guess he does this as some sneaky and clever way of trying to get documentary and material information from others he was too lazy or to ineffective to try to get himself first.

That kind of back-handed, back-door and hypocrtical research philosophy and MO is never going to fly on here or with any golf club either and either his he with them! People like particularly Moriarty but also MacWood really only serve to give other serious minded and dedicated researchers, analysts, historians, writers, particularly with specific clubs something of a bad reputation with some clubs who have not yet had the opportunity or experience of working with really good historians.

TEP
I'm so glad you have lent your expertise to this thread. Sharing your knowledge of the great public course designs of that era has been a tremendous benefit to everyone following this thread. I don't know how you do it, but you always add great substance to these threads.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

You're right, I have no expertise on public courses and as such I probably shouldn't participate on this thread or the others on here like it. The only reason I do is it just disturbs me the way you and particularly Moriarty try to turn any thread on here by Mike Cirba or with Mike Cirba on it on public golf courses into just another opportunity to take pot shots at him and Philadelphia and apparently for his interest and promotion of Cobbs Creek even if he does it by implication.

If one put together the grand total of what you and Moriarty have actually contributed to the subject and field of golf course architecture in your combined lives it would pale in comparison and by a factor of at least ten to the effort and time over the last few years he has put into the hopeful restoration of Cobbs Creek which is now looking more like it may eventually and potentially enure to the benefit of many golfers.

I've never had much connection to public or municipal golf courses but Mike Cirba sure has throughout his life. It never really occured to me previously what the vast difference is between doing what he has for a municipal facility compared to someone who may do the same thing with a private golf course. The latter inherently only enures to the benefit of a limited group, perhaps as much as a few hundred (a membership), while what he's done and is continuing to do is more comparable to a very fine civic responsibility. Again, I'm no expert at all on public or municipal golf courses but the only man I can think of who has arguably done more in that vein recently is San Antonio's Reed Myers; a man I doubt you or Moriarty are even aware of.

In the meantime what have you two done for golf or golf course architecture on here or elsewhere in the last ten years but sit by your computers and pontificate in some attempt to minimize the opinions and deeds of others? And for what reason? At this point, it seems pretty clear for no reason other than to assuage your own insecurities. The only beneficial thing I would say about you, Tom MacWood, is you're not quite as egregious as Moriarty is.

[DMoriarty]

Imagine, being accused by none other than TEPaul  of doing nothing but "sitting at our computers and pontificating."  TEPaul!   The man has deleted more posts than any of us could ever hope to write.    Let's see Tom, you are approaching 40,000 posts, aren't you? And that doesn't even include the thousands you deleted out of embarrassment about your prolific pontification, or the hundreds you deleted to cover your tracks on you obnoxious drunken rants.    Ah, but those were the good old days when you could still cover your tracks by deleting your posts once you sobered up.        

So somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 posts-- a library worth of words--  yet you still haven't found the time to come up with a coherent substantive critique of my IMO?   Too busy, I guess?

As for Mike's efforts at Cobbs, I wish him luck.  I like Cobbs.  It was a very good early public course, and I hope someday they manage to find the money and the right guys to restore it properly.    I don't think the hysterical partisanship or the heavy-handed fluff jobs are necessary or productive, but I guess they just do things differently in Philadelphia.  

I won't even get into the matter of you lecturing on public golf.   That is funny enough on its face.

[TEPaul]

Moriarty:

40,000 of my posts on this website aside, what have you ever done with or for golf or golf architecture on the ground for actual golf clubs and courses compared to me or to Mike Cirba? And what has MacWood ever done in that vein and in that comparison?

And what have you ever written on golf architecture other than that pathetic distorted essay on here entitled "The Missing Faces of Merion?" There are a ton of people who still can't figure out how in the world Ran Morrissett let a piece of garbage like that get on his website.

That seems to be the extent of your contribution to golf and golf architecture, other than your follow-up on all those argumentative so-called Merion threads where you tried to defend yourself and your bullshit essay by playing the part of your argumentative semi-failed lawyer MO and all the rest of your "Oh Woe is Me, why is everyone attacking and insulting me and sullying my reputation?" 

Compared to us you two haven't done anything and after your constant and continous insulting shennanigans on here you will probably never have the opportunity.

But all is not lost for you two, as it now looks like you have shown golf clubs all over the world via this Internet website how not to deal with self-promoting researcher/analysts likw you two who don't even have the commonsense or manners to contact clubs first before making them the objects and subjects of your misguided interest.

[TEPaul]

"As for Mike's efforts at Cobbs, I wish him luck."


Yeah, right, Moriarty! From your posts on this thread it really sounds like you wish him luck. Shall I pull them all up and quote them or would you prefer to just delete them? Are your descriptions like "asinine," "ignorant," and "PHUCKING joker" or 'this is the 932 time he is trying to promote Cobbs Creek' your idea of how to wish someone luck on a municipal golf course architectural restoration effort??  

[DMoriarty]

"As for Mike's efforts at Cobbs, I wish him luck."


Yeah, right, Moriarty! From your posts on this thread it really sounds like you wish him luck. Shall I pull them all up and quote them or would you prefer to just delete them. Are descriptions like "asinine," "ignorant," and "PHUCKING joker" or 'this is the 932 time he is trying to promote Cobbs Creek' your idea of how to wish someone luck on an architectural restoration effort??  

Did I really say 932?  I probably underestimated.  

I like and respect Cobbs.  I'd like to see it properly restored.   It has nothing to do with my opinion of Mike.    

Not surprisingly, you seem to be confused between an honest historical assessment and overzealous sycophantic advocacy.   I think being honest about Cobbs would be the best approach.   Mike apparently thinks over-the-top cheerleading, exaggerating, legend-building, obfuscation, and tearing others down is the best approach.   Must be a Philly thing.  

If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered.    

[TEPaul]

"Quote from: Bradley Anderson on Yesterday at 09:26:12 PM

I'm going to play Merion this fall.  

And when I get out there I'm going to lay my hands on the ninth green and channel the ghost of all the guys who deserve attribution of what is there. I'll let you all know what I discover."




Tom MacWood responded:

"Its good to see your sucking up is finally paying dividends. Your post asking everyone if it was worth reading on after reading half of David's essay is still the single most ignorant post I've seen on GCA....and that is saying something."




Tom MacWood:

In my opinon, and hopefully in the opinions of most on here (hopefully vocalized) you own Brad Anderson a sincere apology for a cheap-shot crack like that.

Hopefully through me and Merion member and historian, Wayne Morrison, Bradley will come to Merion in the fall for himself and a group of his Green Committee for his club. This kind of inter-club education and collaboration is basically always welcomed and encouraged!

What have you done in that vein other than to send a bunch of misguided emails to the club "CCing" the wrong people as well as trying to disassociate yourself from the essayist of that bullshit essay on here "The Missing Faces of Merion?"

[TEPaul]

"Not surprisingly, you seem to be confused between an honest historical assessment and overzealous sycophantic advocacy.   I think being honest about Cobbs would be the best approach.   Mike apparently thinks over-the-top cheerleading, exaggerating, legend-building, obfuscation, and tearing others down is the best approach.   Must be a Philly thing.  

If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered."



You just don't get it do you Moriarty?

You wouldn't understand an honest historical assessment of Merion East if it slapped you upside your grubby unshaven fadish no-count face!

Cirba isn't tearing down anyone as you two jerks are and have been with some of our best Philadelphia "amateur/sportsmen" architects such as Wilson and his club's members.

Your essay doesn't need and definitely doesn't deserve any IMO counterpoint piece or refutation. We thought of that in the very beginning a couple of years ago when it first came out but its reception with the people we care about and respect was refutation and counterpoint enough for us.    

[DMoriarty]

"Not surprisingly, you seem to be confused between an honest historical assessment and overzealous sycophantic advocacy.   I think being honest about Cobbs would be the best approach.   Mike apparently thinks over-the-top cheerleading, exaggerating, legend-building, obfuscation, and tearing others down is the best approach.   Must be a Philly thing.  

If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered."



You just don't get it do you Moriarty?

You wouldn't understand an honest historical assessment of Merion East if it slapped you upside your grubby unshaven fadish no-count face!

Cirba isn't tearing down anyone as you two jerks are and have been with some of our best Philadelphia "amateur/sportsmen" architects such as Wilson and his club's members.

Your essay doesn't need and definitely doesn't deserve any IMO counterpoint piece or refutation. We thought of that in the very beginning a couple of years ago when it first came out but its reception with the people we care about and respect was refutation and counterpoint enough for us.    

If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered.     

[TEPaul]

"If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered."



Your essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" doesn't deserve an IMO and either do you. Again, by ALL the people we care about and respect it was taken as at best transpanently distorted and at worst a real joke. Who needs to counterpoint or refute something that was roundly received like that? I'd say it produced its own refutation. Consequently, no counterpoint or refutation is necessary at this point.   

[DMoriarty]

"If you want to discuss anything further with me, I suggest you do it in the form of an IMO.   Perhaps one of the many you promised but never delivered."



Your essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" doesn't deserve an IMO and either do you. Again, by ALL the people we care about and respect it was taken as at best transpanently distorted and at worst a real joke. Who needs to counterpoint or refute something that was roundly received like that? I'd say it produced its own refutation. Consequently, no counterpoint or refutation is necessary at this point.   

Just keep telling yourself that and maybe some day you will be able to get over it.  

In the mean time, put it in an IMO or shut the hell up.  

[TEPaul]

"Just keep telling yourself that and maybe some day you will be able to get over it.  
In the mean time, put it in an IMO or shut the hell up."



Would you be willing to allow me to introduce you to the people most interested, most concerned about and closest to this particular subject of the archtectural creation of Merion East to see what THEY say about the necessity of an IMO on here or some counterpoint or refutation of your essay on Merion East entitled "The Missing Faces of Merion?"

And if not, why not?    

In the meantime, Moriarty, if you think I'm ever going to shut the hell up on the subject of you and your shennanigans on here, as I've told you many times before, that's not going to happen.
 
 

[DMoriarty]

"Just keep telling yourself that and maybe some day you will be able to get over it.  
In the mean time, put it in an IMO or shut the hell up."



Would you be willing to allow me to introduce you to the people most interested, most concerned about and closest to this particular subject of the archtectural creation of Merion East to see what THEY say about the necessity of an IMO on here or some counterpoint or refutation of your essay on Merion East entitled "The Missing Faces of Merion?"

And if not, why not?    

In the meantime, Moriarty, if you think I'm ever going to shut the hell up on the subject of you and your shennanigans on here, as I've told you many times before, that's not going to happen.
 
 

No, I don't want any introductions from you.   You are an imbalanced creep, and I want nothing to do with you, which is why I've asked you to put your supposed refutation in an IMO and leave me the hell alone.

[Tom MacWood]

Baederwood was Huntingdon Valley Country Club's original course...

Kyle
Do you know if Baederwood was a redesign of HV or a new course built on the site of the old HV?

[Kyle Harris]

Baederwood was Huntingdon Valley Country Club's original course...

Kyle
Do you know if Baederwood was a redesign of HV or a new course built on the site of the old HV?

As far as I know it was the HVCC Noble Course modified to eliminate the road crossings. I know it's profiled in Wexler's one book, but I don't have that handy at the time.

[TEPaul]

Baederwood was a golf club formed in 1927 on the site of the original HVGC (formed in 1897) in Noble. The original nine hole course is attributed to John Reid and the added nine (reputedly in 1899) is unattributed. The course was considered to be one of the longest in the country with one nine of 3400+ yards.

In 1903 this course (HVGC) hosted an important match between the Oxford and Cambridge Golfing Society and the Golf Association of Philadelphia. One of the competitors for GAP was A.W. Tillinghast and one of the competitors for the Oxford/Cambridge Golfing Society was ironically Hugh Alison who would return to this site in 1927 and redesign the course after HVGC had moved to its present site and the Baederwood GC had been formed on HVGC's original site.

Apparently this Baederwood GC course lasted until the 1950s when the site was developed for purposes other than golf.

[Tom MacWood]

Baederwood was Huntingdon Valley Country Club's original course...

Kyle
Do you know if Baederwood was a redesign of HV or a new course built on the site of the old HV?

As far as I know it was the HVCC Noble Course modified to eliminate the road crossings. I know it's profiled in Wexler's one book, but I don't have that handy at the time.

Kyle
Does your info on Baederwood come from Wexler's book or some other source?

[Chris_Blakely]

Mike
There may have been changes to Ottawa Park in the 20s, but Jermain was definitely behind the work in 1898 and 1908 when the original nine and second nine were laid out. Hence his title as "Father of Toledo Golf" and "Father of Public Golf in Toledo." He was also an original founder of Inverness in 1903. I believe he was that club's first president.

I've already cleared up Split Rock.

Tom,

Do you know the yardage of Ottawa Park for the US Publinks?  B/c the course that is in play right now is a whopping 5,079 yards.  I do not have to have overly long courses, but sub 5500 yard courses seem short even for me.  I have always wondered if Ottawa Park GC has undergone major changes from when it opened.  I know Art Hills redesigned it around 1977, but I do not know exactly what those changes were.

Thanks,
Chris

[Tom MacWood]

Chris
I don't know....i'll see if I can find out. I know in 1930 the course was listed as 5321 par-69, and the professional course record was 67 (set in 1924).

[Tom MacWood]

Here is the scorecard from the 1922 US Publinx:

[Tom MacWood]

Here are the qualifying scores from 1922. It appears the medalist blew the field away.

[DMoriarty]

. . . I know Art Hills redesigned it around 1977, but I do not know exactly what those changes were.

Thanks,
Chris

Two articles from the Toledo Blade about the opening:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=8cYxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=0g0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=6738,6284454&dq=ottawa+park+golf+course&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1gkVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cQIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5212,6360053&dq=ottawa+park+golf+course&hl=en

Another article reported the changes cost $600,000.

Sounds like the course fell into disrepair pretty quickly thereafter:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Y3UUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=YgIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4776,6472229&dq=ottawa+park+golf+course&hl=en

[Mike Cirba]

*

[Mike Cirba]

*

[Mike Cirba]

*

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()