[Jeff_Brauer]

David and Patrick,


Patrick,

Nowhere do I say that I believe CBM bought the property first and then embarked on routing and yet you imply that I do and then correct me.  Talk about annoying!  I find myself wondering when you became so combative with Mike C (and me) and why.

My only major disagreement is the contention that the whole shebang was routed quickly in a day or on the first pony ride.  It doesn’t make sense when proposing to build the world’s best golf course, nor does it fit the CBM description of his timeline.  It reads to me like CBM was working on that routing and its details right up to the day they signed on to an exact boundary.  (Well, probably a month short, because it takes time to survey that boundary for the legal agreement, etc.)

Perhaps I under represented how much I have read on this thread.  I have read through this whole thing and have CBM's Scotland's Gift in front of me.  The only thing I haven't done is try to figure out exactly what you guys are each arguing, all three main combatants write a lot without really saying much!  So, I probably don't know your positions, and don't know if the course was routed chronologically Mike's point 6 or 8, etc.

The only thing I know for sure is that it doesn’t sound to me like CBM routed this course quickly.

David,

The Dec 1906 article says that they will be determining distance and hole types in the next five months. Most of it is in future tense, although some is in past tense.  So, I basically agree that some of the routing was probably fixed in their minds – IMHO, probably the most favored template holes -  even if not with a legal boundary, even before the option was taken, but who can know exactly? 

I am not as certain as you appear to be that Scotland’s Gift gives anyone a completely firm timeline.  He jumps back and forth a little bit, mostly because design with templates, routing, and acquiring land is so interrelated that some parts of it can easily be told at different points of the story.

It is only certain that the final routing and details were accomplished from November to May 1907, in the option period.  However, my interest is in imagining the thought process going on in CBM's mind and how that affected what is one of the great courses of America.  If someone can tell me with certainty that the Alps hole was routed on X-XX-1906 or X-XX-1907, that would just be a bonus trivia fact that would be fun to know.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David and Patrick,


Patrick,

Nowhere do I say that I believe CBM bought the property first and then embarked on routing and yet you imply that I do and then correct me.  Talk about annoying!  I find myself wondering when you became so combative with Mike C (and me) and why.

It's probably an overreaction to my chastizing you for not having taken the time to read every reply.
Mike has been intentionally dishonest in some of his replies.  But, you wouldn't know that unless you read them all.
Mike didn't start this thread to be objective.  He started it as part of his attempt to prove that CBM didn't route NGLA in short order and therefore couldn't have routed Merion in short order.

This entire thread is about MERION, NOT NGLA, but, you wouldn't know that because you didn't bother the read this thread in its entirety.
Granted, it's no small task, but, you can't jump into the middle, completely uninformed and lacking any historical perspective (thread wise) and criticize David and me.  Actually, you can, but, it diminishes your credibility.

We know that many old architects routed courses in a day, from the early 18 stakes to Donald Ross.

We understand that Mike won't be objective, that's a given, but, what David and I are dismayed by is the lack of intellectual honesty on Mike's part.
If you would go back and read all of the replies from the beginning, you'll see the emerging pattern.
Since Mike has not been intellectually honest and since he's shifted his position time after time when his latest premise is shot down, his credibility has been undermined and David and I don't trust the conclusions he draws.

What's been frustrating to David and to me, is that he'll post a newspaper article and then provide HIS interpretive summary that differs from the facts in the report, ...... then he jumps to conclusions not borne out by the article, but are based on his intrepretive summary, presenting that false conclusion as fact.

As an example, Mike initially insisted that the land was purchased and then the routing and hole location was done, despite CBM telling us just the opposite.  Mike dismissed CBM's own account, and attributed 100 % accuracy to newspaper articles that were seriously flawed.
Time after time he postured that the flawed articles were factually correct and that CBM's own words were incorrect.

Mike posted a newspaper article that claimed that you could see the Atlantic Ocean from everywhere on the NGLA site, except the low lying areas.  If you're familiar with NGLA you know that statement is completely false, in 1906, 1938, 1956, 2006 and today.
Yet, when I refuted the article, he continued to maintain its authenticity and accuracy.
Finally, after I let him go on and on, I explained that the newspaper article had confused the current NGLA location with the location near the Shinnecock Canal, and that you could see the ocean from everywhere on that property, but not from NGLA.

Then, he posted a map and maintained that the golf course ran on a narrow strip between the RR tracks to the south and the Cold Spring Harbor to the North.  I then pointed out that the North Highway (Sunrise) highway ran right smack down the middle of his entire, long, narrow, phantom golf course.
Mike had again mistaken the location of the land, yet, he insisted that his location was correct, until once again, he understood the error of his ways.

So, it's clear, Mike's not searching for the truth, he's searching for any snippet that would dismiss CBM routing NGLA in short order.

He's been underhanded and intellectually dishonest from the get go, but, you wouldn't know that because you're uninformed due to the fact that you haven't read all of the replies.[/b]
 
My only major disagreement is the contention that the whole shebang was routed quickly in a day or on the first pony ride.  It doesn’t make sense when proposing to build the world’s best golf course, nor does it fit the CBM description of his timeline. 

I think you're viewing the creation of the course in the context of how you'd build a course today, and the two just aren't comparable.
First, CBM had designed his course before he even looked for the land.
He knew the configuration of each of his 18 holes and had only to find land suitable to place them on.

The land was unimportant.

We know that because he would have sited the entire golf course near the Shinnecock Canal had the Shinnecock  Hills and Peconic Bay Realty Company accepted his original offer.

You and others are viewing this issue with 20-20 hindsight, because you're familiar with his Redan, Alps, Eden, Cape, Sahara, Bottle, Leven and other holes, but, had the SHPBC sold him the land near the canal, the course would be configured differently, topographically, sequentially, etc., ett.
He just lucked out with the land.
The best thing that ever happened was the SHPBC refusing to sell the 120 acres he wanted.

So, again, the site was NOT the critical factor, his IDEAL 18 HOLES was the critical factor and he would have sited and constructed them according to the land he had.[/b]

It reads to me like CBM was working on that routing and its details right up to the day they signed on to an exact boundary.  (Well, probably a month short, because it takes time to survey that boundary for the legal agreement, etc.)

I'll ask you again.
Do you think he had the basic routing for the course and the holes basically configured when he initially staked the land ?[/b]

Perhaps I under represented how much I have read on this thread.  I have read through this whole thing and have CBM's Scotland's Gift in front of me.  The only thing I haven't done is try to figure out exactly what you guys are each arguing, all three main combatants write a lot without really saying much!  So, I probably don't know your positions, and don't know if the course was routed chronologically Mike's point 6 or 8, etc.


If you DON'T KNOW our respective positions, I'd recommend rereading this thread.
I think they're fairly obvious.(;[/b]

The only thing I know for sure is that it doesn’t sound to me like CBM routed this course quickly.

We disagree.

Give anyone 18 complete holes and 205 acres and I'll guarantee you that anyone could route a course within a day, if not half a day.[/b]

David,

The Dec 1906 article says that they will be determining distance and hole types in the next five months.

So now you too are going to take the article as being 100 % correct.
Just about every article has been flawed, why do you attribute 100 % accuracy to this article.[/b]

Most of it is in future tense, although some is in past tense.  So, I basically agree that some of the routing was probably fixed in their minds – IMHO, probably the most favored template holes -  even if not with a legal boundary, even before the option was taken, but who can know exactly?

The legal boundary is irrelevant.
CBM stated that he KNEW the land he wanted and staked it.
Surveying and legal document would follow.
It's not like CBM was in a bidding war with Keiser and Trump.
NOBODY wanted this land.
The key is that CBM tells us, he had his course, he had his hole locations and he staked the land he NEEDED for that course.

If you take the 8 popular templates referenced, along with the initial and final starting and finishing holes, the routing becomes a self completing exercise.  Even Max Behr, a contemporaneous architectural source, states that the course routed itself.
[/b] 

I am not as certain as you appear to be that Scotland’s Gift gives anyone a completely firm timeline.  He jumps back and forth a little bit, mostly because design with templates, routing, and acquiring land is so interrelated that some parts of it can easily be told at different points of the story.

"So, Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground.  Finally, we determined it was what we wanted, providing we could get it reasonably.  It ADJOINED SHINNECOCK HILLS GOLF COURSE. The company agreed to sell us 205 acres and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purpose.  AGAIN, we studied the contours earnestly; SELECTING THOSE THAT WOULD FIT IN NATURALLY  WITH THE VARIOUS CLASSICAL HOLES I HAD IN MIND, AFTER WHICH WE STAKED OUT THE LAND WE WANTED

It doesn't get clearer that than.
He tells you that they found the sites for the hole locations of his ideal/classical holes, routing the course in the process, and then STAKING out the boundaries.  He had his routing, he had his classical holes, he had his boundaries, which he staked.  Where you and others get confused is in the reading of the next paragraph, thinking that that's the first time he references his classic holes, but, it isn't, he told you that he found the natural settings for his classic holes, the next paragraph merely identifies them by name, and NOT as the first introduction to his classical holes, in the chronological formation of his golf course.[/b]

It is only certain that the final routing and details were accomplished from November to May 1907, in the option period.  However, my interest is in imagining the thought process going on in CBM's mind and how that affected what is one of the great courses of America.  If someone can tell me with certainty that the Alps hole was routed on X-XX-1906 or X-XX-1907, that would just be a bonus trivia fact that would be fun to know.

NOT TRUE.

Again, where you and others have gone wrong is by MISSING his reference to finding the natural sites for his classical holes before he goes in to describe some of them by name.

He made it as clear as can be, he had his classical holes located/sited BEFORE he staked the land, NOT AFTERWARD.

Now, if you choose to be obtuse, as Mike has, well, that's your perogative, but, a third grader with any semblance of reading comprehension skills understands what's written on the entirety of page 187.  Some have chose to read the last paragraph on that page while ignoring the previous paragraph, but, you can't disconnect the two.

CBM had the holes sited/located and the course routed BEFORE he staked the land.
What follows is irrelevant, or, a hippopotamus if you like.[/b]

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

My browser hasn't allowed posting options for a long time now on this site, so I am not going to give you colored answers on a point by point basis. 

And, there is no need to repeat myself endlessly, but we will have to disagree that anyone could route one of the best golf courses in the world in a half a day.  Whew.  Just don't see how you can make that argument with a straight face in any case, and especially when CBM told us it was a multi part process.  I do believe my experience in routing courses is germain, as not all that much has changed in routing good courses (as opposed to Bendelow's one day jobs which were never intended to be great) so yours is a false comparison.  For that matter, looking at the land plan for the realty company, reading about the land options and purchases, in truth, I doubt much has changed on the legal side of puttin together a golf course either, at least one of quality.  We still need 18 holes, right?

I will have to say again that I have read and reread many parts of this thread.  Your repeating that the course was routed quickly was the one thing that just read really, really wrong to me.  It was frankly kind of insulting to the field of gca to dismiss routing that easily, multiple times.

And, BTW, tell me again how you know for certain what Mike's "agenda" is?  I know why you think it, but wonder what I am missing that allows you to "know" what he is thinking.  For that matter, while not wanting this to really turn back to discussing Merion, I wonder what the connection is.  There are similarities in the two processes, with both leaving wiggle room, and there are differences (site size and the amount to be devoted to golf, differing developers, etc.)  But, we would expect that as no two projects are alike. 

Even if you happen to believe CBM routed Merion alone, which I don't, you have to believe he routed it from June 29-Nov 15, 1910 or Jan-April 1911.  Both time frames are several months.  Either way, Merion wasn't routed in a day, other than by Barker who was paid a nominal fee to provide an opinion and report to the developer, but that plan was never used and never close to being finalized.  Or, are you saying that he routed it in one day on June 29 (?) 1910, even though he wrote a letter back telling him he didn't have the topos in front of him?

So, how do you figure you are proving anything by postulating that CBM could route a course in a day?

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

These guys are both lying through their teeth and playing fast and loose with the facts.

NOWHERE does it say a general routing was completed by the time CBM optioned the land.   NOWHERE.    

Ask David and Patrcik to produce it here and you'll hear the whooshing of running feet in the other direction.

The articles I posted, multiple ones quotng CBM on the same day (December 15, 1906) after he signed contracts to option the land, have him saying "DISTANCES, AND THE HOLES TO BE REPRODUCED WILL BE DECIDED BY THE COMMITTEE iN THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS."

David's plays fast and loose with the facts with his contention that those five months only included "DETAILED PLANNING" when he KNOWS but conveniently and purposefully OMITS CBM's own DIRECT QUOTE OTHERWISE IN THE SAME ARTICLE.  

Ask to see where CBM says that the five months only include "detailed planning of the holes"  and you'll be ignored and likely insulted.

HOW ABOUT PATRICK's FAST AND LOOSE INTERPRETATION...nay, WHOLESALE HERO-WORSHIPPING MYTH-MAKING WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE in the least  of CBM routing NGLA in TWO DAYS!

Ask to see where CBM said that and you'll be told you don't know what your talking about but no evidence will ever be forthcoming.

These guys can't accept CBM as he's quoted, either in news articles or in his book and have an AGENDA.

Ask them to show you where either of the above statements they continually fabricate here are ever mentioned by CBM or in the contemporaneous sources during the creation of NGLA.

Ask them for their proof and you'll never see it.

It doesn't exist.

Actually, David believes CBM but it doesn't fit his agenda.

That is why he has refused to answer my repeated questions as to whether he believes Patrick's assertion that CBM laid out NGLA in 2 or 3 days on horseback.   It is why he refuses to answer my repeated question as to whether he believes Patrick's assertion that ALL of these newspapers misquoted CBM.

He won't answer because he knows the truth but it doesn't serve his agenda.

Patrick, on the other hand, has to simply twist the facts to fit his fantasy and his belief that only having a one man God-King decide everything is the right way to run a club in America.

Either way, you get a twisted version of history, and these guys are arguing with CBM, not with me.   I'm just the messenger.

And then these guys have the nerve to tell me I'm misrepresenting history...what a joke!  

It's time to call BULLSHIT, and ask these guys to put up or shut up.   They don't have a single fact on their side.

Ask them to produce their facts, to pull out the McCarthy-esque letter supposedly hidden in their jacket pockets behind mountains of green ink and torrents of personal spewed insults filling every page here that supposedly speaks truth to the NGLA creation story.

Ask them to show us their proof that CBM was only doing "detailed planning of the holes" after December 1906, or wherever in blazes it is written that CBM routed the course in two days.  

I'm calling their bluff because they are both lying and twisting facts.

Let's see it guys.

They talk about me having an agenda.

You wonder why they are both so combative, no matter how civil I try to keep the discourse here?

It's because I've systematically taken apart their ridiculous arguments over the years that CBM routed Merion during his one-day visit in June 1910 and neither one of them is ready to accept that fact and let go of that childish, silly argument and agenda-driven fantasy.  

One because he arrogantly and incorrectly believes he's smarter than everyone else here and the other because he simply enjoys arguing.


December 15, 1906

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

CBM had already determined the distances for his ideal holes.
He lists them, along with a summary of his ideal holes.

The notion that CBM bought land and then embarked upon the routing and individual hole design is contrary to what CBM wrote.

He stated, chronologically, that they found the holes first, then staked the land that would accomodate them.

That's pretty clear.

As to "fine tuning" CBM never stopped "fine tuning" NGLA as long as he retained any degree of influence at NGLA, which was for decades.

I fear that you've looked at a few fraames, rather than having watched the entire movie.(;

Patrick,

You really, really need to read CBM's book again.

Really.

The list of "Ideal Holes" in CBM's book he produced years before NGLA is NOT the list of ideal holes he created at NGLA.

Don't believe me...try Horace Hutchinson;




Or, Bernard Darwin;



And nobody here said he "bought the land" and then routed the course.   Yet, you constantly misrepresent that I've said that...Why?

He secured 205 "undetermined" acres and then routed the course over the next few months.

He tells us that in articles and he tells us in his book that after getting agreement from the company to sell hiim 205 undetermined acres, he and Whigham studied the land "EARNESTLY" looking for the landforms for their holes...THEN they staked out the dimensions of the property and then bought the land.

WHy do you refuse to believe CBM??

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff Brauer,

Your post is misleading, at best.

There is no article stating that routing the course would take five months.  The December 15, 1906 article from the NY Sun stated that the committee to lay out the course would have five months (until spring) to plan the holes "in detail" and create a topographical model of the the course in miniature to guide the workmen who would begin in the spring.  The same article included a description of exact land to to be used and of a number of the golf holes.   While the detailed planning was not yet complete, the land for the course had already been chosen and the general routing in place.

Jeff,

You dont know what you are talking about.  Why do you butt into these things without even bothering to read the articles?   Research matters. Details matter.  Your opinion means nothing unless you actually know the facts.  

And you have no idea what my position is or isn't.   Yet you hop into these threads and spout off regardless.



Jeff,

Here is the December 15th, 1906 article that elicited David's infantile, insulting responses to you, as well as his bizarre, outlandish interpretation of what the article stated.   You'll note that CBM is quoted, at length, yet David seems to neglect that section, mysteriously.  

Is he going to tell us his flagrant omission of factual information wasn't knowing and purposefully misleading??

Yet, "Resarch Matters"?    "Details Matter"??    

Do you see anything written here about a "general routing" already in place?  

Hmm...yes, I must have missed that too.

Any idea why he would neglect to mention the four paragraphs in the same article quoting CBM directly?  

Is that Quality Research?   Is that Attention to Details??

Yet he has the nerve to insult you??

I'm done wasting my time arguing with these guys.  

I've presented the facts and they speak for themselves.  

If others want to wait for facts from David and Patrick, they will wait til hell freezes over, because there ain't no beef behind all their bluster and bullshit.

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

David also conveniently and knowingly forgets to mention the other articles from December 15th and 17th that tell us how those five months are going to be spent, and what the Committee will be doing.

It's interesting that CBM himself tell us in his book that after the Company agreed to sell them 205 undetermined acres of the 450 available, they again studied the land earnestly, selecting only those parts that fit in with the various classical holes they had in mind, after which they staked out the land they wanted.

Yet here, again, we have proof of exactly when that happened...in the months AFTER securing the 205 undetermined acres exactly as CBM told us, yet David pretends the articles don't say that.

Both of the following articles talk about "Staking out the course" over the next few months...NOT just the "detailed planning" of the holes as David would like everyone to believe.

That is ROUTING, under any description, and under any twisting and attempted distortion of facts or purposeful omission of them.

He knows the facts yet won't honestly present or acknowledge them...why is that?

Instead, he tells us that ALL those articles simply said that CBM would be involved with "Detailed planning".

Why is that??

Patrick, God bless him, just is in complete 100% denial and tells us these articles are all WRONG WRONG WRONG because he doesn't like what they say and they don't fit in with his man-myth of Macdonald.

But David knows the truth, yet seeks to hide it.   Why is that?







It's all exactly as CBM wrote in his book;

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Probably time to let this one die.  All the facts have been presented, as usual.  A few mistakes made on all sides, mountains made of molehills.....well, you know the drill by now!

I appreciate the info and all I can say for sure is that the thread has increased my knowledge of how NGLA was developed, and I am satisfied (despite not being able to read past a third grade level, apparently) as to how it came together.  I had read Scotland's Gift several times, the first time in 1977 when researching my senior theme paper on gca, and having found a copy in the U of Illinois "stacks." I recall reading it on the floor between the shelves, because it was not material you could check out, but it was certainly quizzical given my knowledge at the time, and subsequent readings, and facts filled in from participants here have certainly helped my understanding. 

Of course, that and $4 will get me some coffee at Starbucks, but for some reason, I just like history, despite my not being able to read past a third grade level, and appparently also being really lousy (and unintereseted) at history, according to some.  I wonder who among us had read Scotland's Gift at either age 22 or as far back as 1977, however.  Or, who took the effort to parse it out with only a third grade reading level comprehension!

As you can tell, the biggest dissapointment I have on this thread is the apparent transfer of the esteemed Mr. Mucci over to the dark side of insults, wild statement ("the land doesn't matter") and general bullying instead of discussion.  To me, that was a sad day and/or realization.

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

In fact, one has to forget other details as well to pretend that CBM was only going to be focusing on the "internals" of the holes for five months during his supposed "detailed planning".

Especially since by August of 1908, almost 20 months after securing the land, CBM had placed very few bunkers on his hole internals, but David already knew that as I've already posted the article.

He only added the pre-prescribed bunkers of those few holes that were exact copies, because they needed to be there for reproduction purposes, but most of the rest were going to wait until after observing play, as was the desired approach at that time.

So, what would David have us believe happened in those five months?   What was the "Detailed Planning" that was involved if only looking at the hole internals, and not staking out the routing itself as those contemporanous articles tell us he did??

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

I completely agree and am very saddened as well by Patrick's approach here.

He's much better than that, and I can honestly say that I'm very disappointed in him and the approach he's chosen.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Preaching to the choir there!  As to routing, I just think, even without exact dates in Scotland's Gift, that CBM tells us what happened and the simplest explanation is usually right:

After being rejected on his canal offer, he was directed to the current site.
He and Whigham rode it for three days and determined they could find 18 holes out there, probably noting the Cape and Alp holes specifically among other....
He optioned the property in 11-06 (secured it as written in SG)
The rode it, mapped it, and routed it from then until final closing next spring and started construction when he had the title clear.

I do think that David is correct that they likely picked out some holes before the option, explaining the past tense references to the cape hole, etc.  They probably knew they were going to use the big hill for the Alps hole somehow, but did they have the holes strung together to know which direction they were going to play over the hill?  We can't know, but we do know that they had the opportunity to fix and tweak it after the option, and the article tells us they did that, which is all a part of routing.

So, it is quite possible that some of the routing took place before the option.  Perhaps part of our problem is in trying to define it by certain dates (the option in particular) when in reality, it starts in some sense the minute you step on the land with the intent of finding golf holes.  But, CBM tells us they visited at least twice, and once seems certain to have been after securing the property, if we take the literal reading of his account.

I do wonder why stating the obvious (that the routing took place during the option period for the most part and certainly took more than one day, because CBM told us it did) is cause for insults to my ownself, but I guess that goes with the territory. 

And not to berate Patrick here, but on what basis does he make his one day claim?  I find nothing anywhere but his own "logic" that says it happened that way. I find his comparison of CBM and his methods to Bendelow to be false.  While Ross is credited with many "paper jobs" I don't recall anyone saying that he routed courses in a day, even if on paper without seeing the site, although certainly some did.  As I mentioned to Patrick, while many mistakes have been made by all on this thread, those routing statements of his really seemed to come from left field to me, while I can at least partially understand the rest of the debate.

 

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

You're exactly correct on every count of your previous post.

Why stating the obvious facts and truths is cause for having personal insults hurled your way is simply because the truth doesn't fit either of their erroneous personalized agendas and they have no actual facts of their own to respond with.

David tried to equate what CBM did at NGLA with what happened at Merion and Patrick in his blind idolatry of CBM tried to support David and now that the truth is out and doesn't support their theories, neither of them like it one bit.

So grab a shield, because I'm sure more poo will be flung shortly because it's all they have left.

You just won't find any facts or verifiable evidence among the cartloads of crap.

Not a one.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

These guys are both lying through their teeth and playing fast and loose with the facts.

I'm not lying, I'm merely relying on Macdonald's written words.[/b]

NOWHERE does it say a general routing was completed by the time CBM optioned the land.   NOWHERE.    

Of course it does.
CBM stated that he found the natural sites for his classic holes.
He listed his classic holes
After he found the sites for his classic holes, he staked the boundaries for his golf course.

If you take just 8 of his classic holes, and there were more, the sahara, alps, redan, road, bottle, eden, cape and leven
and you add them to his initial and final starting holes, the 1st, 18th, 9th and 10th,  AND, you know where his starting point at the Shinnecock Inn is, and that the land he wanted bordered Shinnecock Hills Golf course to the East, Bulls Head Bay and Peconic Bay, it's a self completing 18 piece jigsaw puzzle, just as Max Behr stated.

I don't have the graphic capabilities, but, perhaps David can post a blank configuration of the land with just 8 of the classic holes and the starting and finishing holes, you'll clearly see that the routing was done right after he found the natural sites for his classic holes.

The only missing holes were # 5, 6, 11, 12, 15 and 16.
If you look at the land, the above holes get filled in by default as connectors to the classic holes already sited.

Anyone, examining the site, can see this for themselves, that's why Max Behr stated that the golf course routed itself.

Why would he make such an apparently bold statement if it wasn't true ?[/b]

Ask David and Patrcik to produce it here and you'll hear the whooshing of running feet in the other direction.

I just did.
The problem is that you're in denial on any issue, factual or reasoned, that supports CBM's ability to route NGLA or Merion in short order.
That's your agenda, even if Jeff Brauer doesn't get it.[/b]

The articles I posted, multiple ones quotng CBM on the same day (December 15, 1906) after he signed contracts to option the land, have him saying "DISTANCES, AND THE HOLES TO BE REPRODUCED WILL BE DECIDED BY THE COMMITTEE iN THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS."


Mike, CBM told us that he found the sites for his classic holes on his second tour of the property.
CBM told us the distances of his ideal or classic holes.
IF he FOUND the sites for his classic holes on his second visit, WHY would he need the committee to decide which holes to reproduce 5+ months later ?  Don't you see the conflict in the newspaper articles and Macdonald's written words ?
NO, you don't, because you're in denial due to your agenda.[/b]

David's plays fast and loose with the facts with his mention of five months only including "DETAILED PLANNING", when he KNOWS but conveniently and purposefully OMITS CBM's own DIRECT QUOTE OTHERWISE IN THE SAME ARTICLE.  

Mike, it's not a direct quote, it's an alleged quote.
And, we've seen, time and time again, how your newspaper articles were factually wrong.
Yet, you again cling to flawed articles, while ignoring CBM's written word.
How do you explain that ?[/b]

Ask to see where CBM says that the five months only include "detailed planning of the holes"  and you'll be ignored and likely insulted.


The answer is so obvious that it's embarrassing.

Macdonald told his he found the sites for his classic holes.  That's the MACRO architecture, the bones of the course and the routing.
He spent the next 22 years fine tuning them, that's the MICRO architecture.  Unfortunately, Mike doesn't know the difference between the two.[/b]
 
HOW ABOUT PATRICK's FAST AND LOOSE INTERPRETATION...nay, WHOLESALE HERO-WORSHIPPING MYTH-MAKING WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE in the least  of CBM routing NGLA in TWO DAYS!

CBM studied for years, knew the holes he wanted, had physical constraints (East, North and South) in terms of the property, knew his starting and finishing points.  Given those components, routing the course in short order was no myth, CBM tells us how he did it, Mike just won't accept CBM's written word.[/b]

Ask to see where CBM said that and you'll be told you don't know what your talking about but no evidence will ever be forthcoming.

It's all there on page 187 in "Scotland's Gift"
CBM tells how he found the sites for his classic holes, and subsequently staked the boundary lines for his golf course.
He certainly wouldn't stake the boundaries for a golf course without knowing the location of the individual holes and how they connected.
People have to understand that Mike doesn't want to accept that, not based on NGLA, but based on his desire to refute David Moriarty on Merion.[/b]

These guys can't accept CBM as he's quoted, either in news articles or in his book and have an AGENDA.

Mike, you don't know if that's a direct quote from CBM.
We know that some of those alleged quotes were factually wrong.
Do you think that CBM was so unfamiliar with his golf course that he got his facts wrong ?
So stop claiming that the newspaper articles are direct quotes from Macdonald, especially since you don't know that.
Just reference them as alleged quotes.

But, we DO KNOW that Macdonald WROTE "SCOTLAND'S GIFT"[/B]

Ask them to show you where either of the above statements they continually fabricate here are ever mentioned by CBM or in the contemporaneous sources during the creation of NGLA.

I keep showing you page 187, written in CBM's own hand, but, you won't accept his word.[/b]

Ask them for their proof and you'll never see it.

That's because you've chosen not to accept page 184 and page 187 of "Scotland's Gift"
Now, those are just two pages, but, if you read just those chapters in their entirety, anyone with an open mind can see how CBM was able to site and route NGLA in short order.  Much of the work had been done before he even saw the land on the East End.
CBM had surveyors maps and sketches of his ideal/classic holes, he had studied extensively, and, the site was almost irrelevant.
He was going to place those 18 ideal/classic holes on WHATEVER land he could find.

Proof of this was the 120 acres he almost acquired to the West.
Had he bought it, he would have placed his 18 ideal/classic holes on that site.

Had he bought land in Cape Cod, or Mid-Long Island he would have done the same.

The site was secondary, his focus was on designing a golf course that contained the ideal holes in golf..

He just lucked out at NGLA and was able to marry the land to his 18 ideal/classic holes brilliantly.[/b]

It doesn't exist.

I've cited the proof, page 184 and 187, just for starters.[/b]

Actually, David believes CBM but it doesn't fit his agenda.

That is why he has refused to answer my repeated questions as to whether he believes Patrick's assertion that CBM laid out NGLA in 2 or 3 days on horseback.   It is why he refuses to answer my repeated question as to whether he believes Patrick's assertion that ALL of these newspapers misquoted CBM.

Sure they did, and I cited the misquotes and how and why they occurred.
The FACT that they got the same information wrong proves that they didn't independently come into possession of the information, but, merely parroted the first report.  You want us to believe that making the same mistake, over and over and over again, reinforces what CBM is alleged to have said.  It's just the opposite.  CBM would never make the mistakes cited, ergo, they're not quotes from him, but rather, third party representations, representations that are factually INCORRECT.[/b]

He won't answer because he knows the truth but it doesn't serve his agenda.

Patrick, on the other hand, has to simply twist the facts to fit his fantasy and his belief that only having a one man God-King decide everything is the right way to run a club in America.

Wow, you're starting to sound like Charlie Sheen.
Leaping from accepting what CBM wrote in "Scotland's Gift" to the right way to run a golf course in America ?  ?  ?
Now that I've quoted you, you won't be able to erase/edit that baby.  That's really funny and an indication of how desperate you are.
Now, my motive, my agenda for my position on this thread is to reinforce my belief that a dictatorship is the best way to run a golf club ?
Even Charlie Sheen couldn't get away with that one.[/b]

Either way, you get a twisted version of history, and these guys are arguing with CBM, not with me.  

The history is clear, CBM wrote it in "Scotland's Gift"
You just won't accept his written word, prefering flawed newspaper articles instead.[/b]

I'm just the messenger.

That's also funny.
Messenger's usually don't editorialize the message.
Nor do they present flawed/false documents to support an agenda.
Messengers don't have agendas, YOU DO.[/b]

And then these guys have the nerve to tell me I'm misrepresenting history...what a joke!  

Sadly, the jokes on you.[/b]

It's time to call BULLSHIT, and ask these guys to put up or shut up.   They don't have a single fact on their side.

Time after time I destroyed your false, "alleged" facts and showed them to be untrue.
Time after time you presented absurd premises for but one purpose, to show that CBM couldn't route a course in short order.
And, time after time, your flawed, devious premises were shot down.

If an outsider takes a view of this debate, on one hand, you have people supporting what CBM wrote about the creation of NGLA in "Scotland's Gift"
On the other hand, we have you, trying desperately to present anything and everything to dispute CBM's own account.
Why is that ?
For one reason and one reason only, to discount and dismiss CBM's ability to route a golf course in short order[/b]

Ask them to produce their facts, to pull out the McCarthy-esque letter supposedly hidden in their jacket pockets behind mountains of green ink and torrents of personal spewed insults filling every page here that supposedly speaks truth to the NGLA creation story.

The facts were produced, in CBM's own words.
You chosen to ignore them.
You dispute them, choosing instead to cite seriously flawed newspaper articles.
And, all for one purpose, to discount/dismiss CBM's abilty to route a golf course in short order, so that you can dispute David Moriarty's premise.

Isn't it interesting that all the help you've received is from Phillyphiles.
Davie lives in California, I live in Metropolitan New York.
Thus, we have no regional bias, no agenda.
The same can't be said for you and your comrades.
Objective you're not.[/b]

Ask them to show us their proof that CBM was only doing "detailed planning of the holes" after December 1906, or wherever in blazes it is written that CBM routed the course in two days.  

We have, over and over and over again.
CBM told you, on page 187 that he found the sites for his classic holes.
On page 184 he lists his classic holes and their characteristics.
Then, after he found the sites for his classic holes, knew where his starting and finishing holes were, knew his boundaries of Shinnecock, Bulls Head Bay and Peconic Bay, he had his course, his routing, and THEN and ONLY then did he stake the boundary lines so that he could purchase the land.

You cited Max Behr as stating that the golf course routed itself.

If you would take the blinders off, locate the sites for his classic holes, know where the starting and finishing holes will be, know where Shinnecock, Bulls Head Bay and Peconic Bay are, filling in the six or fewer holes is kid's play.  A jigsaw puzzle that completed itself by default.  Even Max Behr agrees with that.

You can't come to terms with the ease of routing because it strikes at the very core of your agenda, which is to prove that CBM couldn't route Merion in a day.

If anyone's been dishonest, in their goal, presentation of the facts and reasoning, it's you. not David and/or myself.[/b]

I'm calling their bluff because they are both lying and twisting facts.


I find that comical because time after time you put forth absurd theories that got shot down.
David and I have been consistent in our position, while yours has changed as each prior position gets refuted.
It's you who have waivered, changing course, changing tactics, presenting allegations and/or third party accounts as facts when you know they're not facts.

You're blinded by an agenda.

I have no agenda.
CBM had already formulated and crafted the design of his ideal/classic holes.
He had survey maps of them, sketches and I think contour maps of them.
He only needed to find the right soil upon which to place them.
He almost placed them a few miles west of NGLA, he considered placing them in other locations, but, lucked out with the land at NGLA.
Placing those holes on the land wasn't a complicated process.
He tells us that he found the natural locations for his ideal/classic holes on his second visit, and, as a result sited them, routed the course and staked the property line.

Answer me this.

If he had detailed, really detailed survey maps, contour maps and sketches of the holes he wanted.
Why would it take him 5 months or longer to design those holes ?
What was there to design ?
He had done the individual hole design work, starting years earlier.[/b]

Let's see it guys.
Reread the above.
[/b]

They talk about me having an agenda.

You do, and many have IM'd and emailed me stating same.
It's obvious to everyone.[/b]

You wonder why they are both so combative, no matter how civil I try to keep the discourse here?


Paging Charlie Sheen[/b]

It's because I've systematically taken apart their ridiculous arguments over the years that CBM routed Merion during his one-day visit in June 1910 and neither one of them is ready to accept that fact and let go of that childish, silly argument and agenda-driven fantasy.  


Paging Charlie Sheen.
White courtesy phone please.[/b]

One because he arrogantly and incorrectly believes he's smarter than everyone else here and the other because he simply enjoys arguing.


When one has the facts on his side, it's been easy to put forth my position.
But, when you knowingly put forth seriously flawed newspaper articles and claim they're factually correct, one has to wonder, why would you do that, unless you had an ulterior motive, an agenda, that would cause you to be intellectually dishonest, since that's the only way to attempt to prove your point.

And, the funny thing is, that despite articles you presented being factually wrong, you defended their errors when no prudent man would do that, UNLESS he had an agenda.

Me thinks Brutus doth protest too much[/b]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Preaching to the choir there!  As to routing, I just think, even without exact dates in Scotland's Gift, that CBM tells us what happened and the simplest explanation is usually right:

After being rejected on his canal offer, he was directed to the current site.
He and Whigham rode it for three days and determined they could find 18 holes out there, probably noting the Cape and Alp holes specifically among other....
He optioned the property in 11-06 (secured it as written in SG)
The rode it, mapped it, and routed it from then until final closing next spring and started construction when he had the title clear.

Jeff, how could you possibly draw that time line after reading "Scotland's Gift" ?  ?  ?
You need to go back and reread page 187.
It's states the opposite of what you claim above.

CBM states that on his second visit, before optioning the land, he found the locations for his ideal/classic holes.
He lists those holes on Page 184.

Only after he located the sites for his ideal/classic holes did he stake the property lines that he wanted and I suspect those property lines were to the West because the property lines South, East and North were already determined.

He tells us of the natural boundaries, South, East and North, leaving only the Western boundary to be established.
Unless of course, you feel that he was going to site certain holes on Shinnecock Hills Golf Course, the road and railroad tracks or underwater on Bulls Head and Peconic Bay.[/b]

I do think that David is correct that they likely picked out some holes before the option,

Some holes ?
CBM states, on page 187:
"So Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over it, STUDYING the CONTOURS of the ground.  Finally we determined it was what we wanted, providing we could get it reasonably.  It ADJOINED Shinnecock Hills Golf Course.  The company agreed to sell us 205 acres, and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purpose.  AGAIN, we STUDIED the CONTOURS EARNESTLY; SELECTING THOSE THAT WOULD FIT IN NATURALLY WITH THE VARIOUS CLASSICAL HOLES I HAD IN MIND, AFTER WHICH WE STAKED OUT THE LAND WE WANTED."


It doesn't get clearer than that.

If you have doubts, go to page 184 and review the list of CBM's ideal/classic holes.

The Sahara, the Alps, Redan, Road, Bottle, Eden, Cape, Leven and others.
He found them, he clearly states that.

Your error is in placing the chronology of the first sentence in the third paragraph ahead of the last sentences of the second paragraph.

In the second paragraph, he tells you that he found the locations for his ideal holes.
In the third paragraph he merely tells you some of the names.
He also tells you the additional natural boundaries in conjunction with Shinnecock Hills Golf course, namely Bulls Head Bay and Peconic Bay.

Thus, he tells you that he had routed his 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 7th, 8th and 9th holes in addition to his 11th, 12th, 13th, 16th, 17th and 18th holes.

The connector 10th is obvious, as are the connector 14th, ergo 15th.

As Max Behr stated, the course routed itself in short order.[/b]

explaining the past tense references to the cape hole, etc.  

It's NOT a past tense reference.
Why do you ignore the previous sentence in the preceding paragraph wherein he tells you he found the locations of his ideal/classic holes ?
The Alps, Redan, Eden and Cape amongst them.

He then tells you that he took the option AFTER the above occured, NOT BEFORE.[/b]

They probably knew they were going to use the big hill for the Alps hole somehow, but did they have the holes strung together to know which direction they were going to play over the hill?

Jeff, have you ever been to NGLA ?

If he had his Sahara, and his Redan, as he said he did, how would you reverse design his Alps ?[/b]

We can't know, but we do know that they had the opportunity to fix and tweak it after the option, and the article tells us they did that, which is all a part of routing.

Nonsense.
Again, you assume the article is completely factual.
CBM had detailed plans of the holes he wanted.
Survey maps, sketches, contour maps.
He didn't need to tweak much.
And, he told us that he found his ideal/classic holes, which he listed for us on page 184.
I won't say this was a cookie cutter project, but, it's darn close.

Jeff, out of curiosity, have you ever played or walked NGLA ?
[/b]

So, it is quite possible that some of the routing took place before the option.  

Your contention is that just some of the holes were located prior to the staking ?
Why would you stake a grand property, 450 acres, and confine yourself to that staked area if you hadn't located all of your hole sites ?
Especially when your Southern, Eastern and Northern borders were established.
OR, as Max Behr stated, was the routing so self evident because of the boundary confines, natural and established, that the routing and Western border were inherently fixed ?[/b]

Perhaps part of our problem is in trying to define it by certain dates (the option in particular) when in reality, it starts in some sense the minute you step on the land with the intent of finding golf holes.  But, CBM tells us they visited at least twice, and once seems certain to have been after securing the property, if we take the literal reading of his account.

Jeff, that's Mike's logic, flawed and convenient.
CBM tells us that he didn't option the land until AFTER he had staked it.
And, he only staked it AFTER he had found the locations for his ideal/classic holes.

You can't ignore that passage on page 187.
You can't refute that passage on page 187.
And, you can't conveniently flip the chain of events, chronologically to suit your purpose.[/b]

I do wonder why stating the obvious (that the routing took place during the option period for the most part and certainly took more than one day, because CBM told us it did) is cause for insults to my ownself, but I guess that goes with the territory.

History tells us that other architects routed/staked courses in one day.
Donald Ross is said to have routed many courses with just a days visit.

Maybe, just maybe, CBM's extensive study, coupled with his predetermined "cookie cutter" holes, combined with his talent, allowed him to route the course in short order.

I'm reminded of Mozart and Solieri.
What Solieri labored on for weeks, months, Mozart mastered almost instantaneously.[/b]

And not to berate Patrick here, but on what basis does he make his one day claim?  I find nothing anywhere but his own "logic" that says it happened that way. I find his comparison of CBM and his methods to Bendelow to be false.  While Ross is credited with many "paper jobs" I don't recall anyone saying that he routed courses in a day, even if on paper without seeing the site, although certainly some did.  As I mentioned to Patrick, while many mistakes have been made by all on this thread, those routing statements of his really seemed to come from left field to me, while I can at least partially understand the rest of the debate.


Jeff, have you ever been to NGLA ?

It's an OUT and BACK layout.

CBM defines that layout, physically, by telling us the borders to the South, East and North, leaving only the Western border to be defined.
But, CBM also tells us he found many, many holes in his out and back routing, including the current 11nd, 12rd and 13th.
When you have already estabished the 1st, 4th, 5th 8th, 9th, in addition to the 11th, 12th and 13th,  the 10th becomes a default connector.

When you have found the 18th, 17th and 16th, the 15th and 14th become default connectors, especially when you already have the 13th.

Please, do yourself a favor and look at NGLA on Google Earth.

Do you not see, once you have located the sites for the ideal/classic holes, know your starting and finishing holes, your boundaries, natural and defined, how the course, as Max Behr stated, routed itself ?

It's so obvious that I'm shocked you don't see it.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

As I have said, I can see where you and David might be coming from, depending on the reading in Scotlands Gift from 187-191, as posted above.

Mike posts the correct chronology as presented on page 186-7.  At least, I have always taken the phrase in pg 187, pp2, "the company agreed to sell us 205 acres" as the option itself.  If someone produces some sort of interim "letter of intent" or similar, before the option document (which seems redundant, but which isn't impossible) then I would agree that routing started before November 1906 and obtaining the option.

But, as it reads, they rode the land once to determine if it was suitable, decided to buy it if possible, and then secured the land (most likely obtained the option) and then started finding golf holes.  No doubt in my mind they did find some of the obvious ones on the first ride, though.

Have you noticed that this passage reads as if CBM gives us a summary of the process over 186-7, and at the bottom of page 187 begins the story in more detail, with the dates of option and final purchase included?  As you note on 188, he again goes over placing the template holes first, etc. even though he has already discussed construction details like 10,000 loads of topsoil. 

It is his writing that leads to different interpretations.  Quite simply, why did he choose to elaborate a bit on the design characteristics, go away from it, even talking of the future clubhouse fire, and then come back to how he found the holes?  He certainly didn't design them twice.

If you go strictly by page 187, its fair to equate the agreement to sell with the option, is it not?   If you consider the last line of 187 as part of the chronology, then yes, it appears as if the routing took place before the option was executed.  It could be either one.   We just don't know.

The kicker for me is the idea that in the newspaper article, he still thinks after obtaining the option that there will be room for members lots, but those never occurred, for reasons unknown.  In any event, the idea of selecting distances, and of configuring the routing to allow pockets of land both fall under "routing" in my book, which is why I say much if not most of the routing was done after the option and before the final staking, which of course, makes loads of sense.

I am perfectly willing to admit I might be reading his passages wrong, and even that the routing certainly started in some ways the minute the ponies hit the ground running, which is why I can agree with David at least conditionally on this one.

That said, the account says that they rode for three days, and then studied earnestly, and of course, we know there were major changes, such as the elimination of housing.  So, once again, I am at a total loss as to how you can say that CBM words tell us that he routed the course in short order.  His words tell us he was out there on multiple occaisions and many days, and yet you say that means it was done in a day.  He says the studied the contours earnestly to fit the proposed holes to the land and you tell us the land didn't matter.  Frankly, unless he had a lot of earthmoving at his disposal, its hard to see how the land wouldn't matter in fitting in his template holes.  But he didn't even have money for a clubhouse.

As mentioned earlier, I am satisfied as to how it happened, and see no need to respond at least to you, since you are bringing less than nothing to this discussion.  It seems that we mostly agree on everything but exact timing, which we probably will never know.  If it turns out that some routing was done pre option, rather than all post option, it doesn't really affect the process of what happened and how it turned out as far as I can see.  I would be more interested in knowing where the first 120 acre offer was made, out of curiosity, and things like why the lots never materialized, because those factoids could tell us more about why what is out there is out there.

There is no real need, IMHO, to continue a debate about whether routing was macro or mini, started in October or November, etc. I am sure some element of routing continued right up to seeding, maybe beyond.  You might consider that some semantics, and thats okay, too.

PS- Pat, yes I have been to NGLA and I have studied it often on Google.  I think I know the place fairly well, although another trip around would certainly always help.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

As I have said, I can see where you and David might be coming from, depending on the reading in Scotlands Gift from 187-191, as posted above.

Mike posts the correct chronology as presented on page 186-7.  At least, I have always taken the phrase in pg 187, pp2, "the company agreed to sell us 205 acres" as the option itself.  If someone produces some sort of interim "letter of intent" or similar, before the option document (which seems redundant, but which isn't impossible) then I would agree that routing started before November 1906 and obtaining the option.

Jeff, I read it differently.
I view the sentence,
"The company agreed to sell us 205 acres as we were permitted to locate it best to serve our purpose."
Not, as you do, but, solely in the context of PRICE, cost per acre.
In order to understand that, you have to read the passage two sentences prior to the above sentence, where Macdonald states:

"So Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground."

Then he states:
"Finally we determined it was what we wanted, PROVIDING WE COULD GET IT REASONABLY.  It adjoined the Shinnecock Hills Golf Course."

My read is that on their first inspection they studied the land, determined that it was what they wanted, but were worried that the Company would not sell it to them for the right price.

Remember, they had just been refused a nearby 120 acre parcel of land for $ 200 per acre, from the same company, so there was ample fear that they might not be able to obtain this parcel for the price they had in mind, which I believe was budgeted at $ 200 per acre.
Hence, the company's agreementment to sell them the land was their FIRST and FOREMOST concern.

From the company's perspective, this land was not as valuable as the land to the West.
The site was 450 acres. Little known, unsurveyed and thought to be worthless, so it would seem that the company wouldn't care which of the 450 acres they could dump for $ 200 per acre.  They were about to make $ 41,000.

Second, you don't option an unidentified or undefined parcel of land.
By your's and Mike's read, CBM could have taken 5 seperate 41 acre parcels, gerrymandering the remaining land in such a fashion that it would be unsaleable or unaccessable.  

Hence, I think the first hurdle was getting the land they rode at $ 200 per acre.
Once the company agreed to the price, they returned for fine tuning, to locate/site their 18 ideal/classic holes, route the course and define the Western boundary, which they did in the staking process.

Then and only then did that option the staked parcel.[/b]

But, as it reads, they rode the land once to determine if it was suitable, decided to buy it if possible, and then secured the land (most likely obtained the option) and then started finding golf holes.  


No, that's absolutely contradictory to what Macdonald writes.
He's clear, they found the location for his ideal holes FIRST, then staked the land, then optioned the land.
Why would you contradict what he wrote ?[/b]

No doubt in my mind they did find some of the obvious ones on the first ride, though.

Agreed, and they found even more on their second study, they located their ideal/classic holes, then staked the defined property line, then optioned the land, then surveyed the land, then bought the land.[/b]

Have you noticed that this passage reads as if CBM gives us a summary of the process over 186-7, and at the bottom of page 187 begins the story in more detail, with the dates of option and final purchase included?

I've certainly noticed the sequence and Macdonald returning in paragraph three to further explain/identify what ideal/classic holes they found on their first and second rides, before they staked the land.[/b]  

As you note on 188, he again goes over placing the template holes first, etc. even though he has already discussed construction details like 10,000 loads of topsoil.

If you read further, after the top-soil reference, which is clearly a construction reference, he goes back again to talk about the ideal/classic holes they discovered.  The Road Hole, the Sahara, The Eden, etc., etc..  But, I think you have to view his initial overview as the time table for the chain of events.

Examining the property, he didn't just choose a random 205 acres, he states that he studied the CONTOURS of the land, obviously looking for the perfect sites for his ideal/classic holes.

I think he got lucky.
Had he been able to buy the land to the West, flatter land, I doubt that many of his stunning holes would have received the accolades garnered over the last 100+ years

Climbing from the huge punchbowl amphtheatre to the 17th tee reveals one of the spectacular views in golf.
The Leven hole that unfolds before you is incredible.
As is the 18th hole that ascends up above the bluff.
I don't know if The Cape, Eden, Bottle, Alps, Sahara and Redan would have been nearly as spectacular had they been sited to the West.

While 20-20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, I think, through luck that the site was begging to be married to the ideal/classic holes and that many, if not most studied students of architecture would have found the Eden, the Cape, The Redan, The Sahara, The Leven and the Punchbowl and current 18th hole quickly.

The OUT and BACK nature of the property, along with the "natural" and "defined" boundaries to the East, North and South, made the task of routing even easier.  [/b]

It is his writing that leads to different interpretations.  Quite simply, why did he choose to elaborate a bit on the design characteristics, go away from it, even talking of the future clubhouse fire, and then come back to how he found the holes?  He certainly didn't design them twice.

"Building Sebonack" is a wonderful contemparneous account of NGLA's neighbor.
But, Professionals were retained to tell Sebonack's story.
"The Miracle on Breeze Hill" another wonderful contemporaneous account of nearby Atlantic, also employed Professionals to tell the story.

CBM wrote the book on his own.
He wrote the book, not as National was being built, but subsequent to the course being in play for years.

It would be great to have the details we seek, but, we're lucky to have what we have.
How many other great, early American courses have their history documented by their architect.
Yes, we can fault his writing style, but, when you combine his written words with practicality, I think it provides a fairly accurate account.[/b]

If you go strictly by page 187, its fair to equate the agreement to sell with the option, is it not?  

I disagree completely.
I don't think it has anything to do with the option, I think it has to do with the price.
He just got turned down for $ 200 an acre, so his biggest hurdle, his biggest fear after determining that the land was right, was, would they sell it to him for the budgeted amount of $ 200 per acre ?

Remember, he had a budget of $ 60,000 to create his golf course.
At $ 200/acre if $ 41,000 could be used for the purchase, he had money left over for construction.
If the cost of the land was $ 300/acre, he had NO money to build a golf course.

Hence, his first concern, once he found suitable land, was being able to acquire it at a reasonable price (within his budget)[/b]

If you consider the last line of 187 as part of the chronology, then yes, it appears as if the routing took place before the option was executed.  

He states, "We obtained an option on the land in November, 1906, and took title to the property in the spring of 1907.

Again, it doesn't get clearer than that.

The reason that they didn't take possession until the Spring of 1907 is that Raynor had to survey the staked land which legally and deed wise defined NGLA's boundaries and the sale/purchase.[/b]
 
It could be either one.   We just don't know.

I think we do.
I think CBM states the time table correctly.
I think he knows what an option is, what staking is, what locating is, what purchasing is, and he clearly spells out each of those steps.
It's only Mike and you and perhaps the Phillyphiles who want to rearrange the chain of events and reinterpret the events that CBM lists.
[/b]

The kicker for me is the idea that in the newspaper article, he still thinks after obtaining the option that there will be room for members lots, but those never occurred, for reasons unknown.  


See, you're falling into the same trap, the trap created by accepting inaccurate newspaper articles as factual.
David went over the land issue in detail with Bryan.  Surely you remember that.
It's clear, that the lots at NGLA are a fiction.

The lots at NGLA are a myth, or at the very least a vestigial or deceased concept.

It's also interesting that Mike managed to forget about his insistance that 60-70 one to one and a half acre lots were part of the package golf course and residences when he postured that the site for NGLA was in the narrow strip between the RR and Cold Spring Harbor Pond, with the North Highway running right down the Middle, unless the rights to the lots were riparian rights.(;
[/b]

In any event, the idea of selecting distances, and of configuring the routing to allow pockets of land both fall under "routing" in my book, which is why I say much if not most of the routing was done after the option and before the final staking, which of course, makes loads of sense.


Jeff, once again you've reversed the order of things, you've put the cart before the horse.
CBM states that the holes were located first, then the boundaries staked.
The option came in November of 1906, the sale in the Spring of 1907
You wouldn't option land before determining which land you wanted.

You wouldn't say, "I'll take that land"  And the seller says, "What land ?"  And you say, "I don't know. but, I'll figure it out."
The seller would say, "Go figure it out, THEN get back to me and I'll tell you whether or not I'll grant you the option"

Just think, would anyone sell 205 out of 45o acres of land to CBM if CBM optioned a 205 acre parcel of land that prevented the seller from gaining access to the remaining 245 acres of land  ? ?   C'mon, think about what your saying.  No way would a seller, who had just previously refused to sell a 120 acre parcel of nearby land, grant an option on an undefined 205 acres out of 450 acres, especially if that option could compromise the value of the remaining 245 acres.

Common sense tells you otherwise.[/b]

I am perfectly willing to admit I might be reading his passages wrong, and even that the routing certainly started in some ways the minute the ponies hit the ground running, which is why I can agree with David at least conditionally on this one.

CBM had already designed his holes, in his mind and on paper.  He only needed a place for them to reside.
He just lost 120 acres down the road that he deemed suitable.  Save for the quality of the soil, he also deemed the land between Amagansett and Montauk to be suitable.
There's no doubt, that when inspecting the land he was also looking where to site his ideal/classic holes.
The hole locations and routing started the moment they mounted their ponies.[/b]

That said, the account says that they rode for three days, and then studied earnestly, and of course, we know there were major changes, such as the elimination of housing.  

Jeff, the housing issue was eliminated before they found the land at NGLA.
The 120 nearby acres they found precluded that concept, a concept perpetuated by the media, not the reality of the situation.
[/b]

So, once again, I am at a total loss as to how you can say that CBM words tell us that he routed the course in short order.
His words tell us he was out there on multiple occaisions and many days, and yet you say that means it was done in a day.


That's not what I said, please go back and reread all of my replies pertaining to the time of routing.
There's no doubt in my mind that the hole locations and routing were done within the timeframe of the two seperate visits cited on page 187[/color

He says the studied the contours earnestly to fit the proposed holes to the land and you tell us the land didn't matter.  

That's correct.
If the Company had agreed to sell him the 120 acres to the West, would the land at NGLA matter ?
Answer:  NO, it wouldn't.
The land wasn't the key.  It was important, but not the key.
His PREDESIGNED holes were the key.
He just needed a place for them to reside.
He tried to acquire 120 acres to the West, he looked at land to the East.
He was looking for any suitable land where his 18 ideal/classic golf holes could reside.
Tell me you understand that quest and how the precise land at NGLA was unimportant had his earlier attempts to purchase been successful.[/b]

Frankly, unless he had a lot of earthmoving at his disposal,


NGLA is highly manufactured.
If you've been there, how could you not know that ?[/b]

its hard to see how the land wouldn't matter in fitting in his template holes.  


Then tell me, how would the land at NGLA matters if the company sold him the 120 acres to the West ?
I can't believe that you're not getting this.
Think globally.[/b]

But he didn't even have money for a clubhouse.

Well, I guess there's no clubhouse at NGLA
What has that got to do with anything ?[/b]

As mentioned earlier, I am satisfied as to how it happened, and see no need to respond at least to you, since you are bringing less than nothing to this discussion.  It seems that we mostly agree on everything but exact timing, which we probably will never know.  If it turns out that some routing was done pre option, rather than all post option, it doesn't really affect the process of what happened and how it turned out as far as I can see.  I would be more interested in knowing where the first 120 acre offer was made, out of curiosity, and things like why the lots never materialized, because those factoids could tell us more about why what is out there is out there.

I can understand why you don't want to listen to a position that refutes your view.
But, I've presented facts, Macdonald's written words and prudent man logic.
You want to move the option date up, ahead of the staking date, ahead of the siting of the hole locations, when CBM tells us just the opposite.
And, I think CBM understood what a tacit agreement, option and sale are.

I couldn't care less about the houses.
That ship sailed with the cost of land and/or the amount of land available and a budget of $ 60,000
If you want to cling to erroneous, shoddy newspaper accounts, you're free to do so.
I don't put much stock in them as they've been shown to be consistently wrong.[/b]

There is no real need, IMHO, to continue a debate about whether routing was macro or mini, started in October or November, etc. I am sure some element of routing continued right up to seeding, maybe beyond.  


Wait a second.
Now you're maintaining that they didn't know the routing even after they bought the property and were building the holes.
That's a new take, wild speculation.  Actually, it's beyond wild.[/b]

You might consider that some semantics, and thats okay, too.

PS- Pat, yes I have been to NGLA and I have studied it often on Google.  I think I know the place fairly well, although another trip around would certainly always help.

Then how can you not understand the long, narrow nature of the property, the limits of a routing on that property on an OUT and BACK routing ?

How can you not understand how the placing of 8 to 12 key holes pre-determines/pre-destines the location of the remaiing holes ?

How can you not understand Max Behr's comment that the course basically routed itself ?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

In the early part of the last post, there is much to agree on, but our understanding is much different in some areas.:

that CBM wrote about both the price (providing we can obtain it reasonably) and what parcels to get (we were permitted to use it to best serve our purposes)  When he writes specifically about both, how can you interpret it as only cost? 
 
But, basically we agree they first rode the property to see if was suitable for golf at all, for if it wasn't, then price wouldn't matter much, would it?  Then they negotiated a favorable/acceptable price.  Then they spent an undetermined amount of time studying it earnestly to site the holes.  No problems so far, other than me thinking he wouldn’t have spent a lot of time routing on land he wasn’t sure he was going to buy yet, and you moving the staking process way up in the order of things and generally gasbagging on and on about a point we agree on as if we don’t.

We start to disagree on the option.  My understanding is that you take an option on land specifically in order to secure your rights while seeking to determine if it can meet your needs (or be zoned, permitted, or in this case, fit 18 holes to your liking, etc.)  An option would be the perfect vehicle for CBM to buy time to study the property. It would also stop potential rivals (other developers or maybe even Shinny itself to stop his project) from buying the property out from under him while he made his studies. 
 
I agree that the realty company still had to agree to the parcel created, but that could easily be written in as a condition to the option.  If you look at many standardized option forms, there are spaces for such conditions, so your example is extreme and probably wouldn’t happen among reasonable men who wanted to make a deal. And, how would CBM make a golf course work on our checkerboard example anyway?  As you must know, conditional land sales are quite common, and CBM told us in his words that the realty company did agree to let him configure it. 

On one hand you say you CBM is telling us what we need to know, and on the other, you are substituting your wild theoretical situations as “proof” that the realty company wouldn’t allow CBM to configure the land.  Patrick, the mere existence of NGLA in its current configuration is proof enough that CBM was able to configure the land and your argument is a complete red herring.

I agree that there may have been some kind of interim agreement before the option, but it would reduce its need to CBM.  Why have two legal documents (one, so far never mentioned) when one would do it?  We can conjecture that it might be to make sure his subscriptions all came back in or to gain other concessions from the company (i.e, building of the Shinnecock Inn to save him clubhouse monies) Yes, that is possible, maybe even likely.

I disagree with your contentions about the housing.  If land cost was an issue, and no housing was contemplated, why did CBM offer to buy 205 acres, when he offered only on 120 acres on the canal site?  When he later told Merion that 120 acres was all that was necessary for golf? What do you suppose the reason for offering on 205 acres was?  And, given we are told by David Moriarity that contemporaneous articles that quote participants are the gold standard of historic documentation, why do you insist that CBM saying in that article (or giving that info to the reporter first hand) is inaccurate?  As of December 1906, housing was in the Sebonak plan, but we agree it was taken out later, for reasons unknown.

You again spend much time telling me I have the order of things mixed up when I have done no such thing.  I understand that he routed the course and then staked the ground (meaning boundaries to set the final land purchase.  To me, the ONLY issue is whether it happened largely before November or after.  And, as stated, I doubt it has made one iota difference to the final product! So, I guess I don’t even really care that much.

I concede it’s quite possible that the course was routed fairly quickly, as that happens sometimes.  But it’s clear to me from your posts that you have no idea how that might come together.  And, I do think I understand the process of routing with templates.  I also note that the newspaper article of December notes that not all the holes had been picked yet, further suggesting the November time frame.

But really, Patrick, you can stop the gasbagging on some of your other points.  In these historical threads, the likes of Mike and I get thrashed by DM and TMac for even a hint of supposition, while you are running rampant discussing how you think the golf course routed itself, etc.  It sure seems fair to have you play by the same rules.

[Mike Cirba]

By all accounts, including CBM's in his book, the "Option" was for an "undetermined' 205 acres out of the 450 available, which would be determined AFTER CBM routed the course and staked out the holes and the exact boundary lines of the property.

Even if we assume that the "Company agreed to sell us 205 acres" line was something informal that happened PRIOR to the actual signing of a contract on December 14th, 1906 to secure the 205 "undetermined" acres, all that does is stretch out the routing period even longer!  

Let's say they started looking at the property in October, as those articles David posted suggest.  

That would mean they looked at the property October, November, and then half of December before even signing a contract to secure 205 "undetermined" acres, and then spent many more months before actually determining the boundaries and completing their purchase in Spring of 1907.

So, for Patrick's "Single Bullet Routing Theory" to have any hope, he'd better hope that he's misreading page 187 as though the "Agreement" and the "Securing" were two different events, because if they are different, that just means it took much longer than we even knew prior.

Before these recent articles from David, and before this strange (mis)interepretation of CBM's book that both Patrick and David insist is correct, all we really knew is that CBM optioned 205 undetermined acres of the 450 available on December 14th, 1906 and purchased the land in Spring of 1907.   We've also learned that CBM had been looking for a theoretical "205 acres" from 1904 on, of which some portion would be used for the golf course, another five acres for the clubhouse and surrounds, and the remainder to serve as building lots for the 60 or so Founders of his club.

But, David and Patrick insist they are right, and they insist only they know how to read the Great Scrolls of CBM accurately, so their interpretation of page 187 actually really extends the timeline for the routing process which I'm pretty sure isn't their desired outcome but is the inescapable reality they've boxed themselves into with their arguments.

If they are correct that they "agreement" and securing" referred to on Page 187 were two separate events, then a logical timeline would stretch out probably over six, seven months for the land study, informal agreement, preliminary routing efforts, formal securing, earnest routing efforts, site survey, clearing efforts, detailed hole planning, and final purchase, which seems about right to me.

Perhaps I don't give them enough credit!    

[JESII]

Mike,

I think the disagreement is quite simply over the definition of the word "UNDETERMINED".

In this context you are defining it as: not yet contemplated. David and Patrick (and a mostly uninformed me as well) are defining it as not yet totally complete.

I would ask this...as I did during the Merion threads...why would CBM lock himself in to an area he wasn't sure he could use when he had the opportunity to take the time to become sure he was going to use it, and how he was going to use it?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim Sullivan,

I think we are all saying undetermined meant “boundary TBD”.  The whole project was obviously contemplated already, so I am not sure what you mean.  For that matter, I can’t conceive that there is any interpretation of those words that would say CBM was locked into anything.  Again, a land option simply reserves the right to purchase for the buyer, pending his determination that the land is suitable.  It only obligates the seller to sell to him first, but the buyer can back out at any time, for the price of his deposit.

I think we are imagining these events in completely different ways based on our understandings of things.

Mike,

Good points on Patrick’s short order routing theory, which simply makes no sense whatsoever.

My interest in just how NGLA might have been, and I woke up wondering about the whole timeline again.  I think we know from Whigham that CBM was back from Scotland in June, no? 

I wonder how long it took him to make an offer and be rejected on the canal site?  Also, he doesn't mention it, but did he do routings on that 120 acres before making the offer?  If so, that due diligence would have taken at least a month or more, IMHO.

As mentioned in my previous post, why did he offer to buy only 120 acres on the canal and then 205 acres at Sebonac Neck site?  Especially if he was short of money?    Lots of swamps that couldn't be used (although I think they filled in some)?  Housing? A desire to really space out the golf holes for a grand scale?  Simply the need to stretch from the Shinny Inn to the Ocean?  (Maybe after settling on that basic practical out and back he realized he would need more than the minimum 120 acres on this site?

Why didn’t CBM take more ocean frontage and make NGLA more like Pebble Beach with a fine stretch of waterfront holes?  I think the practical considerations of the Inn raised their head.  Why would he offer the same $200 per acre for swampy, useless land as for prime land near the canal?

Back to housing, Alvord would know that NGLA would be a boon to their real estate, but why would they allow CBM to compete with their lot sales with his golf course?  Maybe they had no idea of that plan until they read the same Dec 1906 article!  For that matter, as Patrick suggests, Alvord would want some input, and I think they agreed that his parcel would have to be fairly regular and leave Alvord reasonable access to the rest, but had CBM used what became Sebonac, it would have left them a much more valuable parcel in between NGLA and Shinny and allowed CBM to get further away from Shinny as he desired.

Speculation, yes, but as my interest is in how it came to be, and just think of how different NGLA MIGHT have been with more ocean frontage, on the Sebonac property, or narrower on account of proposed housing, just to name a few. 

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I'd disagree with your assessment that our disagreement here can be boiled down to single word interpretation.

Especially when multiple reports directly quote after CBM he formally signed papers to "secure" 205 "undetermined" acres out of 450 available on December 14th, 1906 as saying that the next several months would be spent determining which holes to reproduce and the yardages of the holes.   The articles also make clear that the staking out of the holes and the property are future events in coming months.

To answer your direct question, the answer is, he didn't lock himself into anything undesirable as your question implies.

He and Jim Whigham first rode around the property and found enough natural features, good soil, and overall spaciousness to feel comfortable that it would meet their needs.   During that time they likely found the big hill for an Alps, and CBM himself tells us they found the natural landform for the Redan nearby.   All of his accounts also talk about him finding the inlet for an Eden hole as well as the water for a Cape hole.   They also probably became aware of the Shinnecock Inn and it's suitability for a clubhouse at that time, which gave them logical start and ending points.   We can also assume that they would want to get the course down near the beautiful Peconic Bay at some point.
'
We also know that CBM thought it would take much less than 205 acres to create his course...heck, at Merion four years later he still believed an "ideal course" could be laid out on some 120 acres, and we know he planned for building lots for his Founders.

So yes, the general sections of the overall 450 acres were somewhat self-determined by a few of his early observations/decisions, but that is far, far, far from routing the 18 holes of the golf course, which all contemporaneous accounts tell us happened over the next few months after securing the land.

Once the routing was complete, and the land surveyed and cleared, and the overall land to be purchased determined based on that routing, CBM purchased the specific 205 acres in the spring of 1907.

So no, he didn't lock himself into anything by agreeing to sign papers to the effect that he could find 205 good acres for golf on the 450 that today makes up NGLA, Sebonack, and part of Shinnecock, so he wasn't exactly taking a daring risk.  

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

Gotta run, but a few points.

CBM sought a mythical "205 acres" from 1904 on for his combo of golf course, building lots, and clubhouse.

Why he only offered for the 120 near the Canal is a mystery, but clear evidence he thought he could route a course on much less than 205.

Also, I believe his decision that they didn't have enough money for a clubhouse and the determination to use the Shinnecock Inn shaped the general dimensions of his purchase, because he would certainly want to take the course down to Peconic Bay.

The problem is that he was over a mile away (1.43 miles as the crow flies) with his clubhouse, so instead of using a lot of that beautiful frontage, much of which today is Sebonack GC, he was only able to "skirt" Peconic Bay for a 1/4 mile.

I think that decision more than anything shaped the general dimensions of the 205 acres of the 450 available.

I know we all want it to be about the golf holes, but...sometimes, practical considerations take precedence, as I'm sure you know too well.

As far as using more than 120 acres for NGLA, I believe that a number of factors were involved, including fairways much wider than CBM had originally planned, but also some probably unanticipated site construction realities as seen in this August 1908 article;

]

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

I think you are right on all counts.  In any event, if Alvord had houses planned near the Canal already, via their land plan, he probably conceded right away he didn't need lots there. Its still difficult to imagine that the Realty company would be thrilled with him building lots in competition, so is it just a coincidence that he picked 205 acres at the final property?

Yes, this is a good illustration (as is Merion) of how the practical considerations shaped even some of our greatest golf courses.

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

That's a great point I hadn't considered.

If the 120 acres near the Canal adjoined land already sub-divided into building lots, perhaps CBM figured he only needed to purchase land for the golf course and could work with Alvord to have Founders notified as to which existing plots may be available for purchase directly from the Company.

It would certainly save CBM a lot of time having building lots surveyed, plotted, etc., allowing him to focus on the golf course which was his primary goal.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

I will also note, in the spirit of providing real new info, that TePaul and I discussed this a bit last night.  He says that he has info that Alvord actually filled those low areas for NGLA as part of the land deal, agreed to build the Inn, and agreed to move the RR station for their benefit.  So, CBM's $200 per acre investment apparently came with some perks.

Of course, we cannot know right now if that was part of the give and take that led to elimination of lots, or if it was just too darn expensive to get any utility service up there anyway, and the whole plan wasn't well thought out in terms of what it would take to get lots there.  For that matter, maybe his members simply weren't willing to build second homes out there and told him they would prefer to stay at the Inn when they went, so he scrapped the idea because there were no takers. 

At any rate, he ended up with probably the world's first 200 acre plus golf course, and plenty of width, for reasons that may have had nothing to do with golf design......

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()