News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1325 on: April 12, 2011, 10:18:19 AM »
Mike, I was answering Jim's questions and whether you linked to "all of that" is irrelevant.

As for your links to those two modern photos, you aren't seriously suggesting that the entries to the north and south ends of the CANAL are what the reporter was referring to when he said "inlet" are you?    What kind of a bizarre reading would have him reference those but not notice the CANAL in between.   Only you could come up with this stuff.    I am still waiting for an example of the CANAL having been called an inlet.  

Funny how you have ignored the "various sections" language.

Funny also how you see CBM as entirely beholden to the site of the Inn, yet you seem to have him completely oblivious to the rest of the same development, even as late as October of 1906!  

And Mike, you never addressed my graphic above.  By your understanding of the location of Good Ground, the only inlet between Good Ground and the RR station is the one leading into Cold Spring Pond.

Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1326 on: April 12, 2011, 10:30:10 AM »
David,

I know this was covered earlier in this thread, but regarding that snippet from October I think if we could get on the same page it would only help move Mike that way also. How close is the western part of teh golf course up on Sebonac Neck to the inlet into Cold Spring Pond? And how close is the southern part of the golf course to the railroad tracks? Aren't they both a considerable distance to be considered relevant landmarks? My conviction on this topic is based on my belief that the word "skirt(ed)" describes an extended border as opposed to a glancing touch. If you can convince me otherwise it might be a conversation.

To clarify my entire position on that snippet, I think Alvord leaked it to the press (in Brooklyn) to generate interest in his land, and he described pretty much all of his land...North of the tracks.

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1327 on: April 12, 2011, 10:35:33 AM »
Jim,

The western edge of NGLA is 1.5 miles from the inlet at Cold Spring Pond.

The southern edge of NGLA is .35 miles from the Long Island Railroad, and in 1906 could not have "skirted" those tracks because Shinnecock Hills Golf Club was in the way.    Those railroad holes on SHGC were later abandoned when Flynn did his redesign in the 20s.

Also, almost ALL of NGLA was due north of SHGC in 1906, not east, with perhaps a 100 yard corridor where they adjoined in the far northwest corner of SHGC.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1328 on: April 12, 2011, 10:40:32 AM »
Mike,

Are you in agreement that the October article was very possibly defining a much greater area than a specific golf course acreage? To be fair, I'm hung up on the word "purchased" and I know you don't think it happened that early, but are you at least comfortable with the notion that the land described is Alvord's holding North of the tracks, including Sebonac Neck? A day or two ago you thought it excluded Sebonak Neck, if you still do, can you explain why?

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1329 on: April 12, 2011, 10:50:42 AM »
Jim,

Yes, I'm in agreement that the October article described a section of land larger than any golf course site.

Here's what I wrote you two days back about whether it included Sebonac Neck;

CBM tells us that "everyone thought it was more or less worthless", referring to the land of Sebonac Neck.   Although that seems ridiculous to us now in retrospect, CBM tells us that it was so overgrown and insect and swamp-ridden as to be only passable on horseback.   

So, depending on the timing, I'm honestly not sure if it was included in the land described in that article or not.

But one thing is certain...we know that the southern and western boundaries in that article were NOT land on Sebonac Neck, nor was the eastern boundary of Shinnecock Hills GC at that time on Sebonac Neck.

Given the 1.25 mile stretch to the north of the Peconic Bay over between the canal and the inlet and I'd bet if I had to that Sebonac Neck wasn't being discussed yet, but I may be wrong there.


One other thing is more a gut feel...CBM's book seems to imply that he found (or was shown) the Sebonac Neck site AFTER he was refused the Canal Site.   Since I think the Canal Site was still in play at this time, I suspect the October article was only the land below Sebonac Neck.

But, I could be convinced otherwise... ;)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1330 on: April 12, 2011, 10:55:54 AM »
I guess my thought is that IF (still an if) the snippet was describing all of Alvord's land North of the tracks we would need a reason to exclude Sebonac Neck...and I don't see one. CBM may have viewed it as a consolation, but Alvord surely knew it was there...

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1331 on: April 12, 2011, 10:59:01 AM »
Jim,

Then I guess that question is, did CBM yet know it was there?    Had he and Whigham taken their horse rides yet over 2 or 3 days?

After CBM's death Whigham wrote that they did ride the NGLA land in September, but said it was September, 1907.   God, could any of these guys get a friggin' date right??!  

I guess one thing perhaps we've never considered is that it's possible CBM thought both sites were in play very late in the game (Oct/Nov) until getting rejected for his offer closer to the Canal.

Certainly we've seen nothing that would rule that out, right?
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 11:01:07 AM by MCirba »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1332 on: April 12, 2011, 11:03:41 AM »
Jeff has mentioned a quote from Wigham (maybe in CBM's eulogy?) that they did that exploratory ride in September 1907 and has assumed he meant 1906. I'm inclined to dismiss a source as faulty (not dead wrong, just unreliable to build a case on) when one part is known to be wrong so I don't know. If we are not dismissing the comments by Wigham, and are assuming he meant September 1906 then the canal offer would have been dismissed prior to that.

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1333 on: April 12, 2011, 11:12:53 AM »
Jim,

You don't think it's possible that both sites were still in play,at least in CBM's mind?

That would make the November 1st article talking about "various sections", as well as the November 1st article indicating that his first choice was still the site in western Shiinnecock Hills near Good Ground much more understandable.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 11:23:24 AM by MCirba »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1334 on: April 12, 2011, 11:31:35 AM »
Mike,

I think the word purchased is too compelling.

What do you make of Wigham's comment about making the horse ride on September 1?

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1335 on: April 12, 2011, 12:51:27 PM »


I'm still of the opinion (to which we are all entitled, and seem to have) that the inlet was the one for Cold Spring Pond.  If they were looking for landmarks to describe boundaries, it just seems unlikely that they would have used the "inlet to the canal" rather than the 'canal" itself to define the western boundary.  The canal had been around for years and goes north-south, so could be viewed as a boundary and was well known.  The "inlet to the canal" is a point that doesn't lend itself to being called a boundary of any length.  Jim and Mike, how far north and south do you think would be considered the "inlet" rather than the canal proper?  Do you think they were referring to the North inlet or the South inlet to the canal?

As to Good Ground, I need to re-find an historical article that I previously read that more accurately places it.   I would read the article as defining Good Ground as either the train station of the same name, or the hamlet of the same name that was near the train station.  The map Mike posted is of the modern Hampton Bays that grew out of Good Ground, so I'm not sure it is relevant.  In any event, the inlet to Cold Springs Pond seems more like an inlet and is between the hamlet of Good Ground and the Shinnecock train station. 

As to whether there were trees there, I think David's picture shows pretty clearly there was not.  I also note the bustling South highway receding into the distance.  The North Highway artery is a little harder to discern.   ;)




Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1336 on: April 12, 2011, 01:07:43 PM »
Mike,

I think the word purchased is too compelling.

What do you make of Wigham's comment about making the horse ride on September 1?


Jim,

I think the October 15th article was in error in that respect.

Here's why...

First, no other NYC paper reported that on 10/15.

A few days after that the Lesley Cup ("Intercity") matches were held towards the end of October at Garden City

At that point, we have two NYC papers, The Sun and the Brooklyn Daily Eagle both reporting on November 1 that CBM stated during the Lesley Cup the search was still ongoing.

The Sun reported that CBM was down to two sites...one in western Shinnecock near Good Ground, and one in Montauk.

The BDE reported that CBM had been poking around looking at "various sections" between Sebonac Bay and Shinnecock Hills.

If CBM had already purchased, or even gotten agreement with Alvord at that point, then why would he ever say that?

In fact, the bit about Montauk was likely a bargaining ploy, as we know retrospectively that he thought it was too expensive out there to develop on pure sand.   He was probably trying to get Alvord to believe he had other options.

But, we also KNOW that he seriously looked at and even made an offer in western Shinnecock Hills near Good Ground near the canal because he told us.

So, we KNOW that no purchase was made, or any other agreement made that was solid by the October 15th article.   It was erroneous in that respect, and possibly premature, or even perhaps wishful thinking on CBM's part that he relayed to a reporter.

But, by the Lesley Cup in late October, we KNOW that no deal existed.

Make sense?

Also, I don't know what to make of Whigham's stated month, but I guess it's possible if multiple sites were in play.   We do know it wasn't his first choice, so perhaps that was the fall-back position.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1337 on: April 12, 2011, 01:10:13 PM »
Bryan,

I think the author was referring to the whole canal as an inlet, not the North or South entry. Obviously just an opinion.

I read Good Ground the same as it seems you do. Stretching that far east of the canal seems like a stretch in the context of what this author was trying to describe...would someone even know they they wer ein Good Ground that far past the town and train station?

Hard to really make a prediction about trees and brush between the tracks and an inlet a half mile away based on that picture...the brush close to the camera position seems pretty healthy even if there's nothing over on the hills in the distance.


Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1338 on: April 12, 2011, 01:15:13 PM »
Is that the Atlantic Ocean visible in the distance?  ;)  ;D

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1339 on: April 12, 2011, 01:15:48 PM »
Mike,

Regarding Wigham...I'm curious if you buy the date he declard as September?



Regarding the October report, I've repeatedly said I don't think CBM would have any reason to leak any information prematurely but that Alvord did. Do you agree with that concept in general? CBM wouldn't want any further interest in the real estate out there until he was locked down, but Alvord would want to publicize CBM's interest/purchase because it could only help his development.

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1340 on: April 12, 2011, 01:21:32 PM »
Jim,

I'll concede that's possible if you concede that there is no way a deal had been struck, verbally or otherwise, prior to the Lesley Cup matches in late October.   

CBM's comments about being down to two sites, and possibly rejecting them both and looking elsewhere if the price was too high was an obvious negotiating ploy, and he stated that AFTER the October 15th article.   

He also made clear he was talking about the site near Good Ground (Canal Site) in that November 1st article, not Sebonac Neck.

As far as Whigham...

it's possible they rode in September, but that would mean that they did nothing about it for a few months, still trying to get their first choice near the Canal.   It was only after getting rejected for the Canal site, likely in November, that the Sebonac Neck site became the primary focus.

I'd further surmise that it was probably due to the factors CBM mentioned...overgrown, swampy, bug-ridden, that it was his second choice in the first place.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1341 on: April 12, 2011, 01:25:29 PM »
Mike,

CBM makes it clear that they didn't ride around Sebonac Neck until the canal site offer had been rejected so you have to decide which you believe more...the timing of information given to the newspaper or CBM's own recollection of the events...perhaps Wigham's recollection as well although I don't have his words in front of me.

Isn't it possible that the November article contained dated information? Didn't we see a post early on this thread about on of the papers holding back on some inside info when a competing paper let something out prematurely? I'll go look, but it would be great if someone remembers this...

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1342 on: April 12, 2011, 01:42:02 PM »
Jim,

You're getting confused.  ;)

The November 1st articles did not contain dated material.   They referred to what CBM relayed during the Lesley Cup matches which I believe took place the previous week.

They were VERY current and the BDE article seems to have paraphrased what CBM said on Saturday 10/21.

The reference to holding back info referred to a June 1905 situation where CBM was looking at Long Island, near Westbury, and was unrelated to these events.

I do think it's possible that CBM & Whigham rode around the site in September, only to still be in discussions for their preferred site near the Canal up through early November, and went back to it after their first choice was subsequently refused.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 03:24:04 PM by MCirba »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1343 on: April 12, 2011, 01:59:56 PM »
Gotcha, thanks...confused is passed, we're into full delerium...

Are you willing to dismiss the October article as altogether misinformed and totally false?

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1344 on: April 12, 2011, 02:31:51 PM »
David,    Perhaps a better question is what do you think the dot next to the words Good Ground mean on this map?

While they are not very accurately placed on that map, I think they are RR stations.

Quote
And then, if you were looking at a map similar to that one and reading the passage that says the inlet between Good Ground and Shinnecock Station what would ever make you go all the way to Shinnecock Hills Station before looking a half mile North?

I don't think that article was based on a very inaccurate map that doesn't even show the inlet in question, so I am not sure why I would look to such a map to understand it.   Why not look to the land itself?   Also, I think it odd that your main criticism is that we are trying to read too much specificity into a general description, yet at the same time you seem to be reading things into the description of the location of the inlet.  
-  It doesn't say "Good Ground Station."  It says Good Ground.  We are not sure where exactly "Good Ground" began and ended, but at least some reports put the canal at Good Ground.
-  It doesn't say that the inlet was at the exact middle of the distance between Good Ground and Shinnecock Station. It says it was between Good Ground and Shinnecock Station.  
-  You wouldn't have to go all the way to the Station. The inlet begins about 3/4 of a mile before the station, and I think it would have been visible from further still.
-  While it was all technically Southampton, it seems the area west of the canal was generally referred to as Good Ground and the area east of the Canal was considered to be Shinnecock Hills/Southampton with the Canal acting as a dividing line.  (Although the Canal connects Peconic Bay with Shinnecock Bay, I have never seen the Canal as described as being in Shinnecock Hills, only in Good Ground and/or Canoe Place.)

I know this was covered earlier in this thread, but regarding that snippet from October I think if we could get on the same page it would only help move Mike that way also. How close is the western part of teh golf course up on Sebonac Neck to the inlet into Cold Spring Pond? And how close is the southern part of the golf course to the railroad tracks? Aren't they both a considerable distance to be considered relevant landmarks?

As usual Mike's answers to these questions are misleading.  He admits that the description was of a larger area than just the golf course, but then only measures from the golf course.  And he measures all the way to the opening of the inlet at its far western point!  

A more realistic answer is that it is difficult to say how far the course was from the "inlet" without knowing what was meant by the inlet, but whatever measure is used I have trouble understanding why it wouldn't be from Sebonack Neck, which was the land CBM was first considering.   According the the 1907 plan, the developer owned the narrow strip of extending from Sebonac Neck all the way to the inlet!   Even if we don't consider this strip to have been part of Sebonac Neck, the strip to the opening of the inlet is only about 3/4 of a mile.  If we exclude the strip and measure to the part of marked "Cold Spring Bay Inlet" on the 1907 map, then it is less than 1/2 mile to where the body of water narrows significantly.

It is speculative on my part, but to me that article reads as if whoever came up with the description (probably whoever fed the information to the reporter) didn't really know what to call the body of water we call Cold Spring harbor/bay/pond/inlet.  Otherwise why not just call it what it is?  This is the main sticking point I have with believing the article referred to the Shinnecock Canal as the inlet.   The Shinnecock Canal was well known as such, and enough of a landmark to be identified without reference to a RR station two miles away!  

[As an aside but along these same lines, I think it very possible (if not likely) that the article was referring to the entire body of water as an inlet, and not just the narrower first section   The first part of it is very narrow and I am not sure if the fatter second part disqualifies it from being considered an inlet or not, or whether whoever came up with the description was familiar with exactly what an inlet leading to a pond and what was just an inlet!  In fact, while it looks like it has been formalized somewhat through development, I still I think it is still a bit unclear just what this body of water is, whether a pond, bay, swamp, harbor, or "inlet."  There is already a Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island which only adds to the confusion.  Anyway, If "inlet'was meant to refer generally to the  entire body of water, then it becomes quite clear that they are talking about the Sebonac Neck Property.]

As for the distance to the RR tracks from the course today it is about .35 miles.  There is strip of the SHGC between it and the tracks, but of course Mike failed to mention that there was also a road leading to the Golf Ground Station and according to the location of the Shinnecock Inn on the overlay, it was less than 1/2 mile from there to the the Golf Ground Station.

Quote
To clarify my entire position on that snippet, I think Alvord leaked it to the press (in Brooklyn) to generate interest in his land, and he described pretty much all of his land...North of the tracks.

Maybe, but if so, then I think it more likely that what was meant was the inlet into Cold Spring, because the developer refers to it as "Cold Spring Bay Inlet" on the 1907 map!    But that said, I think it just as likely that CBM told someone that the developer had agreed to sell hims land on the parcel stretching out along Peconic Bay with the westerly point near that inlet (or whatever that water is) and that it would adjoin SHGC and be readily accessible to the RR tracks without having to be right next to them.  This would be consistent how the larger property was described in later articles and by CBM himself.

Quote
My conviction on this topic is based on my belief that the word "skirt(ed)" describes an extended border as opposed to a glancing touch. If you can convince me otherwise it might be a conversation.

Really?   Because it doesn't say that the property stretched along the RR or even that the property "skirted along RR to the south." It says the land was "skirted by the Long Island Railroad to the South."   As I understand it, the verb "to skirt" often times means to go around, or to narrowly avoid.  The RR didn't pass through the land but it did narrowly avoid it.  

Granted, sometimes "skirted" means stretched out along.  But it also means "to narrowly miss" and that works as well or better here, especially when we consider that the land had already been described as stretching out along Peconic Bay!  If it stretched along the RR as well, then then wouldn't it have been simpler to write that it stretched out along Peconic Bay to the north and the RR to the south?  But it didn't.  It stretched out along Peconic Bay to the north and was skirted, or narrowly missed, by the RR to the south.   So it was north of the RR but not right on it.  

_____________________________________

I don't think there is any way in hell the Canal offer was still alive in October of 1907.   Even Mike was dating the Canal offer to June or July of 1906!  What happened to that Mike?

 The developer purchased the property in October of 1905 and CBM decided to go after land around then.   By October 1907 the develeloper had been working on the project for about one year.  CBM would have had to have been a flipping idiot to wait until a year into the development to try and buy land near the canal, right in the heart of the development! Call him what you will but he wasn't an idiot.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 02:34:36 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1345 on: April 12, 2011, 03:17:22 PM »
What is accurate is CBM's description of the location of the 120 acres he tried to buy.

He specifically referenced the 120 acres as being "Near the canal CONNECTING Shinnecock Bay with the Great Peconic Bay.

There is but one canal that connects those two bodies of water.

Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1346 on: April 12, 2011, 03:34:23 PM »
Jim,

I guess under the light of analysis and known facts, I'd be hard-pressed to tell you any part of the October 15th article that's particularly accurate, other than CBM was considering locations in the Shinnecock Hills, but even there it's not very enlightening.

David,

How is it preposterous that CBM would wait a year (after his trip abroad for 5 months to get surveyor's topos of the best holes and features abroad) to make his first offer, but not preposterous for him to wait a year to make his second offer?

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1347 on: April 12, 2011, 03:47:50 PM »
Mike,

You continue to throw out hypotheticals with an agenda, namely, that if David or Jim or anyone isn't able to disprove them, that they must be true.


Mike Cirba

Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1348 on: April 12, 2011, 04:17:13 PM »
Patrick,

My arguments would shorten the timeframe that CBM needed to find the site, secure the property, and route and design the course by over two months from what David is arguing.

I'm really not sure how that is an "agenda" or somehow detracts from your CBM routing NGLA in two-days on horseback fantasy.  ;)  ;D

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles
« Reply #1349 on: April 12, 2011, 04:58:59 PM »
David,

How is it preposterous that CBM would wait a year (after his trip abroad for 5 months to get surveyor's topos of the best holes and features abroad) to make his first offer, but not preposterous for him to wait a year to make his second offer?

Because of the DEVELOPMENT.   The property from the Inn to the Canal was being DEVELOPED.  Roads were being built.  A hotel was being built.  RR crossing were being planned.  The North Highway was reportedly under construction in May 1906.    In contrast, no development was taking place on the Sebonac Neck Property.  And judging by the description in the articles, this process may have been going on for quite some time.

Only an idiot would decide to buy property in a certain area, and then sit on his hand for a year while the property was being developed with the idea of selling it for a substantially larger sum than its predevelopment value! 
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)