[Tom MacWood]

You keep saying we have no way of knowing. Why is that? The lake is going to be built as of December 1914. At that point the the 14th hole is a par 4. How long do youthink it took to realize the new 13th hole was not going to leave room for a par 4 14th?

The new 13th made a new 14th necessary. We do not know exactly when the new 13th was found....that window is from around June 1914 to December of 1914. That is why we have no way of knowing.

[JESII]

We do not know exactly when the new 13th was found....that window is from around June 1914 to December of 1914. That is why we have no way of knowing.

What is the factual basis for ths statement?

[Tom MacWood]

Do you know when the new 13th was discovered?

[JESII]

Based on what I've seen and read it's within a much tighter time frame than you laid out...but perhaps I haven't seen everything. What is your factual basis for claiming the timefram of June - December 1914?

[Tom MacWood]

What is your time frame, and why?

[JESII]

You're a piece of work!!!

Do I really have to say...I asked you first?

My timeline is based on the simple belief that once the 13th green was discovered they knew 14 had to be a par 3, even though Travis may have drawn a Cape Hole as the 14th. I think the par 3 is the only solution once you put the 13th fairway and green where they are now. In December the 14th is a par 4!

[Tom MacWood]

You're a goof ball. You've been telling us for a day and half that the lake was decided before the creation of the 13th. You've told us there is no disputing it. I've said we have no way of knowing exactly when the 13th was created. Its your theory; if you're not confident when the 13th was found (which apparently is the case) then your theory isn't too sound. When was it found?

By the way the same goes for the par-14th. The 14th was originally a par-3. There is no way of knowing exactly when it was converted to a par-4 from a par-3.

[JESII]

As I said a couple days ago, you obviously can't piss straight for your life.

1) As of December 1914 the lake is planned
2) At the same time the 14th hole is a par 4
3) As of January 1915, the 13th green has been discovered forcing the 14th hole to be converted (in plan) from a par 4 to a par 3

Noone could know the day the trees were cleared enough for Crump to identify the 13th green, but considering he hadn't done it yet by the time the December article was written, but before the January article was written we have a very tight time frame.

Do you have any basis for using the June to December timeframe? Otherwise, why are you here?

[Tom MacWood]

It was reported in January in American Golfer that 13th had been discovered. The information reported in magazines was always a month behind, which means the report was written in December. But even if the report was written in December we have no way of knowing when the hole was actually found. Tilly was the primary source for reports on the progress of PV and there are large gaps in his reports in 1914 (he was busy elsewhere). The gap in his newspaper reports on PV runs from May 1914 to January 1915, and it wasn't as if nothing was going on. The course had serious grass issues in the summer and was shut down in September at which time the entire course was re-seeded. Colt was also in the country at the time, and it was reported he would make a return visit.

[JESII]

So what?

How did you come up with June 1914?

[JESII]

Are you sure it was the American Golfer that reported the discovery of the 13th hole?

[Tom MacWood]

Actually it was reported in Tilly's newspaper column in January, but that doesn't change the window of June 1914 to December 1914, which is the gap in his column. There is no way of knowing exactly when the hole was found.

[JESII]

Thank you.

Do you agree that the 14th became a par 3 after the discovery of the 13th green?

Tom Paul thinks Travis drew a Cape Hole of 240 as the crow flies from the current 14th tee to the beginning of the current 15th fairway at some point after the 13th green was discovered but the January article certainly says 'the 14th will have to become a one-shotter'...what do you think?

I've said from the beginning that my theory is based solely on the 14th becoming a par 3 virtually immediately and I agree with that due to the limited amount of room down below.

[Tom MacWood]

It was reported in the December 1914 American Golfer that 13th was a cleek approach, which is consistent with the length of the new 13th (420 yards). The previous hole was much shorter. That info comes from a report from Simon Carr, so maybe my window shrinks to June 1914 to November 1914. By the way that same column has the 14th as a par-4.

The 14th was originally a par-3, which was converted to a par-4, and then a par-3. If you recall that is what I wrote a few days ago and prompted your odd post about pissing. We have no idea when exactly those changes took place.

[JESII]

Tom,

How many times did the 14th (I assume that's what you meant...) change from a par 4 to a par 3?

I have been under the impression that the iteration of the 13th hole immediately prior to finding the current greensite was of comparable length, just out to the right a good ways. Regardless, those yardage by Carr are odd because the 7th and 8th both require the same mashie as the 14th supposedly did. I give him credit for the difference between a par 3 and a par 4, but did the 8th ever really require the equivalent of a 5 iron?

By the way, the odd post is because you love to try to start pissing contests and I'm just not interested...

[Tom MacWood]

The 14th hole in the Travis drawing is a short 4 around the water (my guess somewhere between 240 and 300), with an alternated tee for a par-3 (maybe 140ish).

There are three or four different versions of the 14th, and when they changed is a matter of conjecture.

[JESII]

Do you have any way to date it?

I didn't ask Tom, other than whether he thought it was before or after finding the 13th green.

Why is June 1914 on your radar screen? I can't find any reason for it?

How many times did the 14th change from a par 4 to a par 3?

[Tom MacWood]

You can see the old green site X-ed out, and the tee is basically in the same spot. They are obviously not the same length.

[Tom MacWood]

Do you have any way to date it?

I didn't ask Tom, other than whether he thought it was before or after finding the 13th green.

Why is June 1914 on your radar screen? I can't find any reason for it?

How many times did the 14th change from a par 4 to a par 3?

That is based in the gap in Tilly's newspaper reports on PV. His last report was May 1914 before picking up again in January 1915.

[JESII]

This is what you said a few days ago:

"The 14th was originally a par-3, which was converted to a par-4, and then a par-3. If you recall that is what I wrote a few days ago and prompted your odd post about pissing. We have no idea when exactly those changes took place. "

The 14th hole in the Travis drawing is a short 4 around the water (my guess somewhere between 240 and 300), with an alternated tee for a par-3 (maybe 140ish).

There are three or four different versions of the 14th, and when they changed is a matter of conjecture.

So, if there were 3 or 4 versions of the hole and we assume 1 was the Cape Hole Travis drew and we assume it was after the 13th hole was found (although Tom didn't tell me why he thought that. Was Travis only involved at a point later?)..all we have left is the 3 - 4 - 3 evolution you describe. While it may have been a cool hole, I wonder if Crump gave it any consideration. Can you date it?

We also have an article which says the 13th green was found and the result is that the 14th hole will have to become a par 3...my guess is because of limited room remaining...this looks like a good timeline to me. In December 1914 the 14th is a par 4 and by January it needs to be a par 3.

[Tom MacWood]

This was my post in response to your post:

Pat,

In the December article two things are notable for this conversation:

1) The idea to convert the bog to a lake has been hatched (even if not completed) and,
2) the 14th hole is a par 4 with a mashie approach


In the January article one thing is notable:

1) The 13th hole has been discovered which forces a change to the 14th hole from a par 4 to a one-shotter.


This is quite simple and doesn't mean you are wrong about anything. Please just acknowledge this advancement in the conversation.

You've obviously not read many contemporaneous reports regarding the 14th. The 14th underwent more changes than any hole at PV, and when exactly the present hole was formulated, and by whom, is still a mystery. In Colt's original plan it was a par-3. By January 1914 its described as a 390 yd. par-4, although in the accompanying map shows a long par-3. In January 1915 Simon Carr describes it as a par-4 (mashie approach shot). In January 1915 the Inquirer reported about the progress of the new 13th, and says the new 14th will be a par-3. Walter Travis wrote in article about the reversible version of PV with accompany drawings of two holes. The complete set of those drawings are at PV, and the 14th is a risk/reward short par-4 around the lake, with an alternate tee converting it into a shortish par-3. In Colt's 1920 book there is a photo of the present 15th tee (which is obviously near the present 14th green site). Those photographs were taken by Strohmeyer who photographed the course either in the spring or fall of 1915.

The fact that Colt had a complete portfolio of photos of PV tells me he continued to stay in contact with and advise Crump throughout the process, which I believe is verified by Alison finishing the course in 1921. By the way I'm not aware of any course Colt designed that had fewer than four par-3s.

[JESII]

Tom,

Was anything from Travis implemented?

This is a serious question.

Also, you have the months reversed in the December 1914 and January 1915 section. I blame Mike because he posted the January article from the American Golfer and then backed up to the nespaper artict in December.

I'm curious about Travis.

[Paul_Turner]

Does anyone have Jim Finegan's club history?  He's one of the few who have seen Colt's hole detail booklet. 

Re the 14th, from memory writes something like:  Colt drew a par 3 but also wrote "390 yds" which was then crossed out.  So I wonder how that plays in?  Can anyone confirm exactly what Finegan wrote?

[Tom MacWood]

Jim
To my knowledge nothing of Travis was implemented. The drawings were meant to show how the course as planned could be played in reverse.

Paul
I haven't seen the booklet, but this is what Finegan wrote:

"But it is the 14th that intrigues. Colt had penciled '210 3.' This was consistent with his hole sketch. But the '210 3.,' is clearly visible on the page, has been crossed out. And in its place is written '400 4.' What prompted this change? A rethinking by Colt? An insistence by Crump that a par four, not a par three, was called for at this point in the round? This seems unlikely in the light of Crump's stated preference for a course that would have 'four one-shot holes.'"

My first question would be is it possible to determine the hand of the person who changed the yardage. Finegan seems to indicate it was Colt, but who knows. I knew Colt had a well known preference for a minimum of four par-3s, I was not aware of Crump's preference. Where does that come from?

In the red/blue drawing it looks like they considered moving the 13th green up to the right of the present green and farther past the original green location (it X-ed out in the drawing). That change might result in 390-400 yard par-4 to Colt's original 14th green location. That is one possibility.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

The articles were presented in the way I found them as the topic evolved.  

For the record, here again are the articles, this time dated sequentially.

American Golfer, Dec. 1914;

As an illustration of the magnitude
of the work, let me tell you that in one
place, nearly twenty acres of bog will
be made into a lake and it requires but
small imaginative power to picture its
attractiveness in the days to come.
To give an idea of the demands of
Pine Valley, let me quote from the recent
report of the club secretary, Dr.
Simon Carr:
The total length of Pine Valley course is
about 6,700 yards. It is not a sluggers
course in any sense, except in the opinion
of those who fix their standards by parlor
golf played only with a mashie and putter.
The following is an analysis of the shots
up to the green, based on the supposition
of good driving from each tee:
3 brassey approach shots, at holes 4, 16,
18.
4 cleek approach shots, at holes 1, 6, 9,
13.
4 midiron approach shots, at holes 2, 11,
12, 17.
4 mashie approach shots, at holes 7, 8,
14, 15.
The one-shot holes are: No. 10 for a
short iron, No. 3 for a long iron, No. 5,
full shot with a wooden club.
This arrangement give a full, well-balanced
variety of approach shots as anyone
could wish, and they are skilfully distributed
over the round.


January 10th, 1915, Philadelphia Record




March 1915, American Golfer

At Pine Valley the new
holes will be completed as
rapidly as possible. The
original plans have been
changed slightly for Mr.
Crump uncovered a magnificent
hole when he cut
the timber from the ridge
which is encountered when
the 12th green is quitted.
The drive is across a deep
depression and unless the
shot is a long one the green
will not be in sight. Along
the left of the fairway extends
a pronounced throw
which will take a hooked
ball and send it far from the "straight
and narrow." This new 13th certainly
is one of the best of any on the new
course.


That the 13th was created much before Oct/Nov 1914 seems to me a  bit of a red herring.   It also seems like another vain attempt to "suggest" that Colt may have been involved at that point, and date the creation of the hole(s) to his visit.   I would add that although there was apparently a report of Colt possibly visiting PV during that year, there is no absolutely record that he did and Tillinghast tells us clearly how the hole was discovered.

Tillinghast reported on PV's progress in the December 1914 issue of American Golfer (Tom MacWood states the articles usually were  published a month after being written), yet doesn't mention the new 13th/14th.   

In fact, he doesn't mention them in American Golfer until March 1915.

For a discovery that he was personally involved with, and on the site with Crump at the time, and with Tillinghast stating they may have found one of the greatest par fours anywhere  it seems a bit much to ask us to believe that this happened 6 months prior.


Tom MacWood,

Where did I call Fowler a penal architect?

I said he argued for stiffer courses, where every hole was a good test, and he obviously created penal hazards around which to frame his strategies.

Don't start relying on cheap political labels to make your point...you can't tell us that Fowler didn't argue for longer and tighter courses to challenge the top golfers with more interesting, strategic match-play holes featuring penal hazards which to challenge or play around, which is why his philosophy was greatly admired by the men creating Pine Valley.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()