[DMoriarty]

Andy,   I don't think that CBM would have been concerned with maximizing the amount of waterfront property either.   A few pages ago I responded to one such claim as follows, ". . .for CBM the quality of the golf course was the main criteria, not the scenery.  In this regard, while views were nice, a seaside location was a necessity because only a seaside (or sea-approximate) location could provide the proper conditions (such as the proper soil, undulations, winds, etc.)  for ideal golf.  So while views were undoubtedly a bonus, they were not a driving consideration."

__________________________________________________

Bryan,

I had just assumed that the ride had occurred during construction, which had been ongoing for many months by September 1907.  Yet now that you have pointed it out, it looks as if this ride occurred before they had chosen the land.  (With the old men providing prophecies about what would happen if CBM and HJW chose the site.)   The copy in George's book also gives the year as 1907, but 1906 would make more sense.  

As for the roads, do you have any explanation as to why some buildings and roads might have been missing from the 1903 map?

[JESII]

Jim,

I'm not sure which of these you missed prior?

Mike,

I didn't miss any of those, I just wasn't sure which you took as gospel and which you dismissed completely.

What I was actually asking was, as David suggested, was do we have any evidence of the actual Option contract?

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

I think you need to rely on facts instead of hysteria and myth-making as to the location of the "North Highway" in 1906.

There is no way it ran through the land where I proposed CBM might have been looking for his golf course.

Not a chance.   Bryan has shown again and again that your understanding is simply wrong.

Hope you're feeling better, and I'll resist any "eyes" jokes.   I'd much rather talk about your nurse.    


Patrick/David/Bryan/Jeff...others,

Many articles, including the November 1st 1906 article I posted above state that CBM had been looking at "various sections" around Peconic Bay and Shinnecock Hills.   Another article on the same day indicated that CBM was still looking near Good Ground in western Shinnecock Hills.

Where do you think those other sities were located?


Bryan,

That's a very interesting quote...I'd be curious to know the exact story and if Whigham got the date right.   Damn, these guys weren't very good about that, were they?  :-/

[Mike Cirba]

Bryan,

I'm not sure if you ever read the following, posted well back in the early pages of this thread;


The entire hamlet of Hampton Bays, seen in the map below, was known at the beginning of the 20th century as "Good Ground".

The hamlet was settled in 1740 as "Good Ground", which became the main hamlet of eleven in the immediate area. The area where Main Street, also known as Montauk Highway, is located today, was the approximate area of the original hamlet known as Good Ground.

There were ten other hamlets in the area. The other hamlets in the area were called Canoe Place, East Tiana, Newtown, Ponquogue, Rampasture, Red Creek, Squiretown, Southport, Springville, and West Tiana. Most of these hamlets were settled by one or two families and had their own school house. Many of the names from the former hamlets are still featured as local street names today, as well as Hagstroms maps and Road Atlases.

As a result of the growth of the surrounding hamlets and villages in the Hamptons and increased tourism from New York City, the eleven hamlets, although generally called "Good Ground" collectively by the early part of the 20th century, amalgamated under the name "Hampton Bays" in 1922. The motive behind the name change was for the hamlet to benefit from the "Hamptons" trade that the hamlet's neighbors were experiencing.


Here is the area that was known as "Good Ground" in the early 20th century.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I'm not sure what further evidence you're looking for?

CBM told us he secured the property in November 1906...when he told us he got agreement from the Company he wrote;

"The company agreed to sell us 205 acres, and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purpose."

The contemporaneous news articles dated the signing of that contract to Friday, December 14th, 1906, and said virtually the exact same thing...the company agreed to sell CBM 205 acres of a 450 acre plot and the boundaries were undetermined so he could have flexiibility to route the course as he saw fit.   They even QUOTED CBM SAYING THE EXACT SAME THING!

I'm not sure what more you're looking for than a first-hand account and corresponding contemporaneous news articles quoting CBM telling us the exact same thing??  

I seem to be the only one here who is believing Macdonald...the rest of you can't believe what he tells us so you seem to want to make up your own legends.    

He never says he routed the course and then secured the property.   Never.  Nowhere.  No How.

He says he and Whigham found some great natural features to utilize, decided it was what they wanted, and then moved forward to secure enough of the property (under a contract that gave them flexibility as to the eventual borders) that enclosed those natural features to meet all their twin goals for golf and building lots.

The latter idea fell by the wayside for reasons that I think we've gone over well enough.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I reread that paragraph and more from HJW in George's book.  While the 1907 appears to be a mistake, its enough to convince me that the land search started in September 1906, initial purchase announced in October, etc.  Also of interest in George's timeline is that that Raynor was hired in 1907 and according to HJW, first looked at the topo maps others had drawn for CBM abroad.  And, that Raynor was hired as a surveyor, and then to assist in construction at the "first seeding."

While we can argue all day, this is enough to convince me (for now) of a later timeline more along the lines of what Mike is contending, and which fits with the known purchase timeline according to the newspapers.  This last little tidbit sort of fits my "simplest explanation is usually the most logical" theory of history.

I will also note they returned to Shinny for lunch after their pony ride, and I will cut Patrick off at the pass - I do not believe that NGLA routed itself in "half a day."

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

I did overlay the 1903 map onto the Google aerial and the three squares (buildings) on Tuckahoe road north of the tracks fall directly on the SH clubhouse.  If you feel there are roads missing on the maps, perhaps all it means is that they were insignificant.  I'd put the most faith in the 1903 USGS map.

Mike,

I don't know what to make of the sources. They all seem to be suspect in some fact.  We're trying to find some logic in what may be erroneous "facts" by all parties.

Yes, I had read that on the Hamptons history site. Population was 504 in 1870.  Must have created a lot of traffic for Patrick's highway.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bryan,

So right you are on that road.  While I can't speak authoritatively on moving roads on LI, I can tell you that in some of my research in other areas, its quite common to find structures, roads, etc. on those old maps that don't show up consistently. It could be errors of the mapmakers (or be influenced on what they were hired to map exactly) or a function of a rapidly changing area.  And, there were probably more fires out there than just the Shinnecock Inn.

In 1873 those dotted lines were probably literally indian trails. In 1903, small paths for horse and wagons to those few houses built (mostly from shareholders in the land company according to one account)

I wish we could put this whole road issue to bed, including the road through the 9th tee, etc.  Its obvious they moved more than a Mel Brooks mole.

[Mike Cirba]

Bryan,

Thanks for pointing us to Whigham's account in George's book.

When we talk about what was involved with the routing, Patrick has contended that it was EASY because CBM already knew all 18 holes he wanted to produce so he could just fit them like jigsaw puzzle pieces.

I'm not sure why he would say that because CBM, Hutchinson, and many others told us that CBM's thinking had evolved at that point where only 4 holes were actually reproduction templates, with the remainder of the golf holes either "Composites" of features he admired overseas, or wholly original holes.

Whigham apparently agreed;

He did not, it is true, reproduce eighteen classic holes.   The holes he copied in detail were the Redan at North Berwick, the Alps at Prestwick, , and the Eden and the Road holes at St. Andrews.   Several other holes at the National have features borrowed from Littlestone and Muirfield and elsewhere.   But it very soon became apparent to Maconald, once he had picked his ground on Peconic Bay, that nature, here too, had her own suggestions and it was far better, and certainly much more amusing to utilize existing features of the land than to copy slavishly from the great masterpieces.  Indeed, what Macdonald actually accomplished was finer than what he had originally planned.   He did produce a course with eighteen great holes, and in doing so created masterpieces of his own which have been reproduced in many parts of America.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

How....ingenous of you......

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

I prefer "ingenius", but I've been called so many names and insults on this thread by those hoping to squelch the facts and discussion and speculation based on those facts that I've lost track.   

Just don't call me late for dinner, tee time, or bed.

[JESII]

Gump, you're a damned genius...you'll make lieutenant some day...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

Maybe you should start a thread on Forrest Gump quotes.....no golf relation, but he did enjoy riding his lawnmower, so maybe close enough?  Vietnam is now building golf courses.  Close enough?

[JESII]

I actually played the course (in South Carolina) where the Vietnam scenes were filmed..."Hi Bubba!"

[Mike Cirba]

Did Gump ride horses?

[Jeff_Brauer]

No, he outran them. But based on these last passages, will some future historian declare that the signature meal in the NGLA clubhouse was a revolving menu of shrimp based dishes?  But, only using shrimp recently having been fresh road kill on the long existing North Highway?

I know a few amateur historians who would probably make the case that this was true, using their "critical thinking."

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,

My mistake,  I had SHGC shifted too far left.  Here is the 1903 map with a rough overlay of the current golf course land.

[JESII]

David,

I cannot prove it, but I don't think Shinnecock goes that far north. Did you see it touching Sebonak Creek on an aerial/Google earth?

[DMoriarty]

Jim,  That is where it falls on the overlay, and everything else lines pretty much up.   The 1903 map has Sebonack Creek further south and much wider as compared to to today.  On Google Earth it looks like Sebonack Creek runs almost to the North Highway.  

[JESII]

Yeah, I just looked on Google Maps (not Earth) and it went right to it. The creek is narrower, but both are drawings so accuracy isn't expected in my opinion.

[Mike Cirba]

Bryan,

My mistake,  I had SHGC shifted too far left.  Here is the 1903 map with a rough overlay of the current golf course land.

David,

Wouldn't it be much more illustrative and illuminating to use the boundary dimensions of Shinnecock GC as it existed in 1906, or if we are uncertain what that entailed, how about 1916 where we know exactly the dimensions from the scaled map Bryan provided?

Are we still hoping to make it appear that Shinnecock was predominantly east of NGLA back then?

[Mike Cirba]

I guess perhaps I missed something, because I'm not understanding why we'd want to see the dimensions of today's Shinnecock GC, which bears little resemblance to the land it occupied in 1906, or even in 1916, which I've roughly illustrated below.

Anyone care to enlighten me on what is significant about today's dimensions?   Thanks.

[Jeff_Brauer]

This was touched on a few pages ago, but George Bahto's book says CBM tried to purchase Shinnecock Hills GC from the realty company.  Was it on leased land at that time?

The book almost makes it sound as if the original offer was actually the golf club itself, and not some other property near the bay.

Also, while there is no need to split hairs to the nth degree on a side issue, from reading that passage in George's book again, he mentions that CBM did want Peconic Bay front property for yacht landings, so it was desireable. 

When I said I had no doubt he wanted more shore, I wasn't necessarily thinking just in terms of views, but in the overall replicating of his beloved St. Andrews, although granted its not all by the sea either.  And, given CBM did actually have the right to choose from over 450 acres, and didn't have to do the out and back routing even after choosing the Inn as the clubhouse, the fact remains, he did do so, for some combo of views, golf holes (although the current 18 doesn't really fit the water closely, but is just adjacent so it wasn't necessarily the golf topo that drove that decision) and docks seems to have influenced CBM to go that route.

Saying he would go there just for views, and views weren't his primary goal is a bit too simplistic statement.  He had the chance to use different land with good contours, and chose to stretch the course to the Peconic Bay, so I think its reasonable to conclude he wanted to.

It was also written that he acquired an extra two acres to "protect themselves" a few years later.  Was this the open land near 18 tee perhaps, to stave off someone building a house out there?

Last question...where was CBM's house across the bulls head bay and does it still exist?

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba,
 
I posted the graphic so readers could better understand the location of the current golf course land on the 1903 map.  NGLA wasn't there at all in 1903, so will you accuse me of trying to create the false impression that it was?   Had I been trying to misrepresent the actual borders from 1906, then I wouldn't have indicated that the graphic was a rough overlay of the "current golf course land."  And I don't need your advice on what you would find "illustrative or illuminating" or what you want to see.  

You've got some nerve, given the multitude of misleading and misrepresentative scribbles you try to pass off as fact.  Even your latest drawing is wrong.  

[Mike Cirba]

David,

The northernmost part of Shinnecock Hills GC in 1916 was approximately 700 yards north of the LIRR, or approximately 110 yards north of the southern border of NGLA.

If my rough drawing is "wrong", then please tell us where, but don't just continue to make baseless accusations, please.    

Drawing the Shinnecock Hills GC as it stands today where considerable land had been purchased to the north of the 1906-16 property  lines in the 1920s is misleading to the casual reader, whether or not you intended that, and I think you'd want to be more precise.

Thanks.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()