[Dan King]

So Patrick finally admits he got his Marion Hollins story from Mark Frost. I agree with you Patrick, there is a good chance Frost's story is fabricated, much like many of Frost's stories. I've wasted numerous posts assuming you were referring to the MacKenzie story. It has nothing to do with 1956 or modern swings, or balls or equipment. It has to do with Frost makes up stuff.

Patrick_Mucci writes:
For you to say that you're neutral on the issue is preposterous.
You've not applied the same standards to disproving Hollins's alleged event that you applied to disproving Hogan's, Nelson's, Venturi's and Ward's events

I haven't applied the same standards to disprove the Kennedy assassination either. Must be because I'm not neutral on the Kennedy assassination.

I agree with you Patrick, Frost more than likely made up the story about Hollins. Now how come you do not apply the same standards you used to disprove the Frost version to disprove the real MacKenzie version? Not your made up MacKenzie version but the one in the Spirit of St. Andrews. The one earlier you mentioned in this thread that is on page 135.

Patrick Mucci writes in Post No. 37:
He recounts the event with Raynor on page 135 of TSOSA, he didn't witness the alleged event, and only recounts.

So why did you later lie about what MacKenzie wrote?

Cheers,
Dan King

America is a vast conspiracy to make you happy.
 --John Updike

[Bruce Katona]

Someone a few pages back posted they currently reside in Ms. Hollin's former residence and she still occasionally pops in for a visit.  lets just settle this and have the gentleman ask her the next time she appears.

[Michael Moore]

Pat -

In a 2006 discussion of how far Bob Jones could carry the golf ball, you wrote -

"The Laws of Physics, not hearsay and/or myths determines carry."

In this discussion you wrote

"For an event to be factual there has to be substantive concrete evidence that it occured, absent that evidence, the alleged event remains a myth."

Can you explain how your thinking has changed over the years, how you made the switch from physics-based evidence to more of a witness-based standard of proof? Thanks.

[Charlie Goerges]

Just for the heck of it, here is an old photo I found labeled Miss Marion Hollins. This a cropped and reduced version of the original.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Moore,

There's no conflict in those statements, only in your mind.

[Alex Miller]

Those statements do not conflict, but it seems the ideology behind them does. My two cents.

Anyway, Pat, in your thread regarding the Raynor routing it seems your premise there offers the same idea as on here, yet you seem to be leaning in the opposite direction. Why?

Here you cited a lack of first-hand documentation, though there is second-hand, as the cause of your doubt of Ms. Hollins shot.

There you cite second-hand documentation and circumstantial evidence as the prompt for discussing the possibility of CPC's Raynor influences.

This is not an attack, but I am curious why you have seemingly conflicting viewpoints. Could you share your thoughts about?

[Jon Wiggett]

I have not read the last few pages of this thread which I have missed over the last few days. The reason is the Pat M's selective answers. He overlooks replying to questions which he can't answer without contadicting his own theory. It is a shame that such a knowledgable person should act in this slightly blinkered manner

Pat, the facts are:

1. That in 1949 Hogan, by his own admission, was hitting the driver an average of 265 yards.
    John, that includes ROLL.  And, I bet he wasn't hitting it that far in dense, cooler ocean air.
    The FACTS are that Harvie Ward and Venturi confirmed that Hogan hit a driver, SHORT, so why are you inserting totally irrelevant
    elements into the discussion.  What part of the confirmation by Ward and Venturi don't you get ?
Yes Patrik that would include roll but so would his shot on this particular day. Lets assume as you seem to, that Hogan hit it pretty full. Why would it be so short, head wind maybe?. Also, do Ward and Venturi say Hogan or any of the group hit their teeshots full bore? Do we have a date for the supposed Hollin's shot? Maybe this was at a warmer time of year
2. When the match was played it was not so warm
    I already stated that the temperature was around 62-65 degrees, sweater weather.
    What does that have to do with the FACT that Hogan hit driver that day ?Cooler weather, more clothing and so less freedom of movement hence shorter shot, maybe!!!

Also does it say anywhere they all hit the driver full tilt?

He came up short.  If he came up a little shorter, he'd be in the ocean, something that I"m sure he wanted to avoid.
All the other golfers also hit driver.
If you know anything about the hole, you know one thing, you don't want to come up short.
Your want to ERR on the LONG side.Maybe he just misjudged or even mishit his shot slightly

Have you ever played the hole ?No, but I bet you didn't back in the 1920's so you cannot judge the Hollin's shot any better than the rest of us.

And finally Hollins was more than capable of hitting the ball 200+ and maybe she had a helping wind.
So am I and so is Pat Burke a former PGA Tour Pro, but, we both had to hit driver and that was with modern balls and equipment.

Now do you get it ?Pat, are you suggesting that a modern tour pro only hits the ball 220 yards. This is where I have a real problem with your take on things. Modern pro's hit the ball much futher than this even without roll. The only reasons I can think of for a modern tour pro to hit the ball so short with a full blooded driver are: into a strong head wind or massive difference in elevation. Or do you expect anyone to take you seriously in stating this?

Jon

[Dan King]

Jon Wiggett writes:
Or do you expect anyone to take you seriously in stating this?

Pat used unreliable sources and said something really stupid at the beginning of this thread. Now he is stuck defending his indefensible position. It leads him to say stuff that leaves many scratching their head wondering what Pat has been smoking.

He expects us to take him seriously and he just can't figure out why we are all giggling at him.

Cheers,
Dan King

It is my opinion that there is no woman in the country who could defeat Miss Hollins if she could be satisfied playing a woman's game. [However] if she ever played safe in her life I was not there to see it and I have never heard of anyone who was.
 --Ann Trabue, reporting on the 1932 Pebble Beach Tournament

[Patrick_Mucci]

SURPRISE.

All of you morons, cretins, blind followers, what do you say now ?

Neil Crafter has posted MacKenzie's plan from 1926 clearly indicating that the 16th hole is 200 yards from the back tee, NOT 220 or 230.



Appologies will be graciously accepted.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I have not read the last few pages of this thread which I have missed over the last few days. The reason is the Pat M's selective answers. He overlooks replying to questions which he can't answer without contadicting his own theory. It is a shame that such a knowledgable person should act in this slightly blinkered manner

Pat, the facts are:

1. That in 1949 Hogan, by his own admission, was hitting the driver an average of 265 yards.
    John, that includes ROLL.  And, I bet he wasn't hitting it that far in dense, cooler ocean air.
    The FACTS are that Harvie Ward and Venturi confirmed that Hogan hit a driver, SHORT, so why are you inserting totally irrelevant
    elements into the discussion.  What part of the confirmation by Ward and Venturi don't you get ?
Yes Patrik that would include roll but so would his shot on this particular day. Lets assume as you seem to, that Hogan hit it pretty full. Why would it be so short, head wind maybe?. Also, do Ward and Venturi say Hogan or any of the group hit their teeshots full bore? Do we have a date for the supposed Hollin's shot? Maybe this was at a warmer time of yearJon, when it's seasonably warmer the prevailing winds blow out of the west, into the golfer's face.
So you can nix that theory

Harvie Ward indicated that he didn't challenge the tee shot to the green because it was too difficult and the only reason he hit driver that day was because Hogan hit driver.  Why do you keep denying and questioning  facts that have been clearly established ?

Have you ever played the hole .  They ALL hit driver to the green.
Venturi told me he hit driver, Venturi and Ward told Jeff that they both hit driver as did Hogan

2. When the match was played it was not so warm
    I already stated that the temperature was around 62-65 degrees, sweater weather.
    What does that have to do with the FACT that Hogan hit driver that day ?Cooler weather, more clothing and so less freedom of movement hence shorter shot, maybe!!!

Jon 62-65 is hardly cool weather at CPC.
Accounts indicate that some were wearing sweaters, hardly restrictive clothing

Also does it say anywhere they all hit the driver full tilt?

He came up short.  If he came up a little shorter, he'd be in the ocean, something that I"m sure he wanted to avoid.
All the other golfers also hit driver.
If you know anything about the hole, you know one thing, you don't want to come up short.
Your want to ERR on the LONG side.Maybe he just misjudged or even mishit his shot slightly

Yeah Jon, Hogan who had played the course before , armed with a good caddy, would misjudge the shot.
Maybe you would, but Hogan wouldn't, the same goes for Ward, Venturi and Nelson, who ALL hit driver.

Have you ever played the hole ?No, but I bet you didn't back in the 1920's so you cannot judge the Hollin's shot any better than the rest of us.

Jon, that's really a dumb remark, one you wouldn't make if you had played the hole

And finally Hollins was more than capable of hitting the ball 200+ and maybe she had a helping wind.
So am I and so is Pat Burke a former PGA Tour Pro, but, we both had to hit driver and that was with modern balls and equipment.

Now do you get it ?Pat, are you suggesting that a modern tour pro only hits the ball 220 yards.

Are you calling Pat Burke a liar.
He told you that out of four occassions, three times he hit driver.
I told you that I've hit driver on several occassions.
Why don't you get it ?
I know why, because you're NOT familiar with the hole and the conditions of play


This is where I have a real problem with your take on things. Modern pro's hit the ball much futher than this even without roll. The only reasons I can think of for a modern tour pro to hit the ball so short with a full blooded driver are: into a strong head wind or massive difference in elevation. Or do you expect anyone to take you seriously in stating this?[/color]

Jon, the wind that day, from a nearby weather station, was at 1.8 knots, hardly a gale.
Take me seriously ?
Ward and Venturi stated that they hit driver as did Hogan.
Those guys were there, they know what they hit and what the others hit.
Why do you deny the facts ?
Are you calling Venturi, Ward, jeff, myself and others liars ?

And now we have some recently discovered facts.
The hole wasn't 220 or 230 yards, it was 200 yards in 1926.
That changes things a bit doesn't it.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thanks Neil.

Here is the 1926 plan for Cypress Point, as drawn up by San Francisco artist Albert Darrows, based upon a sketch that Mackenzie provided him with. I expect the plan came out of Mackenzie's first visit to the US and to Cypress in Jan to March 1926.

How it differs from Raynor's plan is very hard to say, but as Hollins was there with both of them, its fair to say she had her influence, so some holes would be routed the same. And the final on the ground routing differed from this routing too.



As for 16, here's an enlargement showing the hole as Mackenzie first sketched it. Please note the rear tee that is shown giving the dotted alternative line of play as a two shot hole. The card on this plan shows the hole as a 200 yarder, so perhaps when Hollins made her shot it was not as long a carry from the rear tee today. From what I have read, Mackenzie was not all that confident about the hole as a par three, and in an early article on the course, published in The Fairway magazine in November 1928 (and Golf Illustrated UK) he lists the hole with a championship length of 350 yards, compared to the regular length of 240 yards. Geoff S in his book suggests that Mac was keeping his options open, and if play as a long par 3 was too problematic he would then lengthen the hole to a two shotter by building that championship tee so that the hole could play at 350 - presumably there was enough space between 15 and 16 to allow for that.

So, Mac's first iteration for 16 was a shorter hole, some 40 yards shorter in fact. And Hollins shot across the chasm may well have been played from ahead of where the current back tee sits, making the carry less that 200 yards.

[DMoriarty]

SURPRISE.

All of you morons, cretins, blind followers, what do you say now ?

Neil Crafter has posted MacKenzie's plan from 1926 clearly indicating that the 16th hole is 200 yards from the back tee, NOT 220 or 230.

I can't speak for all of us morons, cretins, and blind followers, but as for what this particular moron-cretin-blind follower thinks now, I think that it is a shame you didn't read my post back on page one of this thread where I informed you that the tee location was different (and shorter) on AM's 1926 plan, and that Hollins may not have been hitting from the same tee location.  

[Garland Bayley]

SURPRISE.

All of you morons, cretins, blind followers, what do you say now ?

Neil Crafter has posted MacKenzie's plan from 1926 clearly indicating that the 16th hole is 200 yards from the back tee, NOT 220 or 230.



Appologies will be graciously accepted.

Yep, When are you going to apologize to Marion Hollins and her heirs for disabusing her all these years.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland,

Was it Jim Carey who said,
"And the truth shall set you free"

I hate it when I'm right, but, probably not as much as you.

Neil Crafter, myself and others theorized that the shot may have taken place, but, not from the distance/s alleged (220-230)

MacKenzie's rendering seems to confirm that.

Appologies will be graciously accepted 

[Garland Bayley]

...
Neil Crafter, myself and others theorized that the shot may have taken place, but, not from the distance/s alleged (220-230)
...

Please reference one place that has not been edited on this website where you "theorized" that the shot may have take place.

[Kevin_Reilly]

From "AM's CPC" p. 36:

An additional issue in the planning stages revolved around the 16th.  There are various theories about this hole, but the facts remain fully straightforward.  Marion Hollins insisted that the 16th play as a par 3 over water.  MacKenzie's initial routing suggested a par-3 in the 200-yard range, but that would have put the tee in an awkward, less visually interesting position.  MacKenzie also had an optional par-4 tee in his drawing and apparently believed strongly in that option until he and Hollins were in that area testing out tee sites.

[/size]

Geoff then quotes from SoSA...and this account has her hitting the balls in front of AM, not SR.

So Pat, while the routing above is interesting, and is featured on pg 37 of Geoff's book, as Geoff notes "this was later fine-tuned".

[Kevin_Reilly]

Neil Crafter, myself and others theorized that the shot may have taken place, but, not from the distance/s alleged (220-230)

WRONG -  see my post above

MacKenzie's rendering seems to confirm that.

WRONG - see my post above

Appologies will be graciously accepted 

I'll insist on a properly spelled apology from you.   

[Alex Miller]

This thread is a good laugh.

The fact is Pat was doomed from the beginning. He stated that the myth was there were 3 balls played from 220. Well of course he was able to debunk that myth, no one has ever heard that story before.

As has been quoted numerous times, the only written source of this "myth" is AM's account which states "Marion Hollins, had walked the land with him when he was in the process of determining where the holes should be. When she suggested what is now the location of the 16th, he asked her to play a trial tee shot. The green now rests where her ball landed."

If this thread has done anything it's made a strong case that she did make it, especially in light of the evidence Patrick brings to the table as helping him. One of the main reasons he said that the story was pure myth was the presumed fact that Ms. Hollins couldn't carry the ball 220. As anyone can see, that does not matter!

I think everyone should go back and read page 1, particularly Adam Clayman's posts which were days ahead of their time. If you'll notice, Mr. Mucci was not so happy with the idea that the tee was not at 220 yards for some reason (I see now it's because in his story of origins unknown he assumes the shot is from 220), so I am left to wonder why he is so ecstatic as to its fact now.

Anyway I look forward to finding out more about the origins of CPC on the other thread.

[Neil_Crafter]

well said Alex

[Matt Day]

It might be my aging eye site but it looks like the pirate map of CPC states that its "approximate lengths of holes in yards"

[Kevin_Reilly]

It might be my aging eye site but it looks like the pirate map of CPC states that its "approximate lengths of holes in yards"

It was in fact 200 yds from an "awkward" tee but it doesn't matter.  It was a March 1926 early rendering that was subsequently discarded when MH and AMac went out and visited the 16th hole for the shot heard round the world.  That according to Geoff's book, which I would tend to favor over Mark Frost's.

[Neil_Crafter]

Matt, yes approximate length in yards, but given the numbers shown I'd say it is to the nearest 5 yards.

[Jon Wiggett]

I have not read the last few pages of this thread which I have missed over the last few days. The reason is the Pat M's selective answers. He overlooks replying to questions which he can't answer without contadicting his own theory. It is a shame that such a knowledgable person should act in this slightly blinkered manner

Pat, the facts are:

1. That in 1949 Hogan, by his own admission, was hitting the driver an average of 265 yards.
    John, that includes ROLL.  And, I bet he wasn't hitting it that far in dense, cooler ocean air.
    The FACTS are that Harvie Ward and Venturi confirmed that Hogan hit a driver, SHORT, so why are you inserting totally irrelevant
    elements into the discussion.  What part of the confirmation by Ward and Venturi don't you get ?
Yes Patrik that would include roll but so would his shot on this particular day. Lets assume as you seem to, that Hogan hit it pretty full. Why would it be so short, head wind maybe?. Also, do Ward and Venturi say Hogan or any of the group hit their teeshots full bore? Do we have a date for the supposed Hollin's shot? Maybe this was at a warmer time of yearJon, when it's seasonably warmer the prevailing winds blow out of the west, into the golfer's face.
So you can nix that theory

Patrick, that is why they hit driver, because of the head wind and not the distance. So, if Marion Hollins did not have a head wind and played from 200 yards then the green would have been reachable. You have based your argument on ignoring some facts (head wind) and not knowing or considering others * shorter tee(

Harvie Ward indicated that he didn't challenge the tee shot to the green because it was too difficult and the only reason he hit driver that day was because Hogan hit driver.  Why do you keep denying and questioning  facts that have been clearly established ?

Have you ever played the hole .  They ALL hit driver to the green.
Venturi told me he hit driver, Venturi and Ward told Jeff that they both hit driver as did Hogan

2. When the match was played it was not so warm
    I already stated that the temperature was around 62-65 degrees, sweater weather.
    What does that have to do with the FACT that Hogan hit driver that day ?Cooler weather, more clothing and so less freedom of movement hence shorter shot, maybe!!!

Jon 62-65 is hardly cool weather at CPC.
Accounts indicate that some were wearing sweaters, hardly restrictive clothing

Also does it say anywhere they all hit the driver full tilt?

He came up short.  If he came up a little shorter, he'd be in the ocean, something that I"m sure he wanted to avoid.
All the other golfers also hit driver.
If you know anything about the hole, you know one thing, you don't want to come up short.
Your want to ERR on the LONG side.Maybe he just misjudged or even mishit his shot slightly

Yeah Jon, Hogan who had played the course before , armed with a good caddy, would misjudge the shot.
Maybe you would, but Hogan wouldn't, the same goes for Ward, Venturi and Nelson, who ALL hit driver.

and mishit Patrick? Once again ignoring possibilities that do not fit your vision of events

Have you ever played the hole ?No, but I bet you didn't back in the 1920's so you cannot judge the Hollin's shot any better than the rest of us.

Jon, that's really a dumb remark, one you wouldn't make if you had played the hole

It seems not so dumb. Had you have played the same shot as Hollins then you would have known about the shorter length

And finally Hollins was more than capable of hitting the ball 200+ and maybe she had a helping wind.
So am I and so is Pat Burke a former PGA Tour Pro, but, we both had to hit driver and that was with modern balls and equipment.

Now do you get it ?Pat, are you suggesting that a modern tour pro only hits the ball 220 yards.

Are you calling Pat Burke a liar.
He told you that out of four occassions, three times he hit driver.
I told you that I've hit driver on several occassions.
Why don't you get it ?
I know why, because you're NOT familiar with the hole and the conditions of play
No Pat, I am not calling Pat Burke a liar.  PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION. Where did I say he or you did not hit driver? But why was driver hit. If we are to believe you it was because of the length hence my comment

This is where I have a real problem with your take on things. Modern pro's hit the ball much futher than this even without roll. The only reasons I can think of for a modern tour pro to hit the ball so short with a full blooded driver are: into a strong head wind or massive difference in elevation. Or do you expect anyone to take you seriously in stating this?[/color]

Jon, the wind that day, from a nearby weather station, was at 1.8 knots, hardly a gale.
Take me seriously ?
Pat, anybody with a little knowledge of seaside courses knows that the wind there is never constant. 1.8 will be an average but do you have higwind stats? Maybe this is why Hogan came up short

Ward and Venturi stated that they hit driver as did Hogan.
Those guys were there, they know what they hit and what the others hit.
Why do you deny the facts ?
Are you calling Venturi, Ward, jeff, myself and others liars ?

Again, where do I ever say this?

And now we have some recently discovered facts.
The hole wasn't 220 or 230 yards, it was 200 yards in 1926.
That changes things a bit doesn't it.


yes, Patrick it does. So there is another reason why Hollins could have hit the tee shot and so you discredit your own argument

Jon

[Michael Moore]

Neil Crafter, myself and others theorized that the shot may have taken place, but, not from the distance/s alleged (220-230)

No, what you said was "Nonetheless, it's another account that conflicts with the others, leading me to doubt any and all of them."

[Mark Pearce]

Only Pat Mucci could cite evidence that completely undermines his position (which, in case anyone isn't clear, was that Hollins could not have made the carry from the tee (not the modern tee, the tee)) and claim that it proved himself right. I have to say I admire such chutzpah.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()