Pine Valley and Topos

[Joe Bausch]

Seeing many (?most) of the articles posted on this thread are mine, I thought I would add this one to the mix, as it has been lonely and not getting much attention.   

From the 1927 edition of the Camden Evening Courier.

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba,

Didn't you just indicate that you were done communicating with me?  As usual, that was misleading.  Don't worry though, I didn't believe you for a minute.  I take everything yo write with a grain of salt, for good reason.

My post about Merion was addressed a post to JIM SULLIVAN. It was addressing his questions. Nothing in it required you to again post the same article that you post on ever f-ing page.   Posting the article again was entirely pointless.

Do you have to have a knee jerk reaction to everything I post, whether it concerns you or not?   Do you really think this advances the conversation?  Or do you try to bury my comments by spewing whatever article you happen to have handy? 

Are you like Pavlov's dog?  Is my post like your bell, and like the dog you slobber all over the website with your mindless and repetitious posting of these articles? 

Or maybe I'd better stay away such comparisons.  Given that you still cannot seem to decipher that tricky like trying-to-explain-Dostojevki-to-a-mule simile, perhaps such figures of speech are beyond your powers of comprehension.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Actually, Patrick, Jeff, Paul, and I were having a VERY productive conversation that was totally on topic today until you showed up.

I'd prefer we don't communicate at all, but any nonsense you see fit to address to me usually requires some type of response.

[Mike Cirba]

Joe,

Thanks...I think some of my posts should have the disclaimer "90% of the reproduced materials here were found by Joe Bausch".   

Two points of interest in that article.

It does state that he worked silently on the project from 1910 to 1912, which is consistent with Tillinghast's January 1913 train story ("nearly three years ago") timeframe, yet he also says he bought it for hunting and had it for some years, which doesn't seem consistent with a sales date of November 1912.   

[DMoriarty]

Cirba,

My post on Merion was to Jim Sullivan, addressing his questions.  It neither required nor requested a response from you.  You just couldn't help yourself.    But as usual you misrepresent this to try and make a petty point.

And surely your 90% figure drastically underestimates Joe's contribution.
___________________________________________________

Seeing many (?most) of the articles posted on this thread are mine, I thought I would add this one to the mix, as it has been lonely and not getting much attention.  

From the 1927 edition of the Camden Evening Courier.

Thanks for posting the article Joe. I hadn't seen that one and it seems to add yet another version of the story to the mix.  If  Crump had acquired the land for hunting sometime in the past (or even acquired the right to hunt the land) then that would seem to confirm the hunting story. I guess this author missed the train on the AWT train story though.  

The 1910 date fits with one of AWT's version, but AWT didn't say he had owned and been working on the project for two years, so no exactly.

If the 1910 date is correct (I have no idea but it could be easily ascertained) by someone in the area - no doubt our crack Philly researchers in the area have never bothered - then that would mean that Crump already had the land when he traveled overseas, wouldn't it?   Or did he go in 1909?  I don't feel like looking it up right now.

This may have already been noted, but on August 17th, 1910 the Inquirer reported the sale of his hotel (and a house) had been recorded.

As for almost all the articles being yours, that doesn't surprise me.   What I wonder though, is why more articles crediting Colt with the layout do not make it to gca.com?  I've come across quite a few of them and I am sure you have too.  I trust you would agree that was quite a long period of time where most of the mentions primarily credited Colt.  Yet most of the articles that make it to CBM are only those discussing Crump.    Is this your editorial decision, or is it Mike's?    

[Mike Cirba]

The contemporaneous articles were written by Tillinghast and they are superb because they show what was done months before Colt's May/June 1913 visit (today's holes 1, 2, 3, 4, & 18), and show to a great extent what was done to Colt's proposed routing after he left, essentially complete changes to Colt proposed holes 12, 13, 14. 15.

In fact, they are the ONLY contemporaneous articles written that start this early in the project and follow closely and document the progress of Pine Valley up through his death and afterwards.

Combined with the progression of topo maps from March 1913 on, through the subsequent "as suggested by Harry S Colt" map, through the blue/red topo map that show additional changes of significance from Colt's plan at holes 2 and 7 and we get closer to answering Patrick's original question(s) with actual evidence instead of what we wish or logically think should have happened..

As regards attribution, this is what Tillinghast wrote upon the death of Crump in 1918;

He discovered this wonderful tract of land when it was covered with trees and to many it seemed like folly to attempt transforming it to a golf course. But with great courage and patience Mr. Crump stuck doggedly to his task. With his own money he purchased the land, afterwards turning it over to the club which was formed. He built a bungalow and lived on the tract, personally overseeing every detail of the construction.

After seeking the advice of the most widely known course architects, he carefully reviewed their suggestions, rejecting many, accepting some but it must be said that the entire credit for this course of wonderfully fine holes must be given to Mr. Crump himself.

The course had many advisers and it's tough to parcel out credit to everyone and be accurate, but I think it's very fair if one wants to summarize to call it a Crump/Colt course, which has been generally acknowledged through its history.

[DMoriarty]

Joe,

I am not sure why Mike is chirping his same old song in that last post, except that after every of my posts he feels it necessary to post some repetitious drivel that has been covered 100 times before.  It is as if he is in constant need of proving he cannot follow the discussion.

But to be clear, my questions and comments were for you, including the question about why it is that only the articles pointing in Crump's direction end up on gca.com?   We both know there is a slew of articles out there pointing the other direction, and I am just wondering how this process works?   Do you send Cirba everything you find on PV, and then he picks out only what he thinks he can twist to his view?   Or do you know him well enough by this point to only send him that which he wants to know about?   Or something else.   Don't get me wrong.  I assume that any sleaziness and gamesmanship comes from him and not you, but since you have acknowledged that essentially all he contributes are your articles, I am just curious as to how it determined what of yours he posts and what of yours he doesn't? 

I guess that is the advantage of doing my own research and always speaking for myself. I don't have to worry about whether the behavior of others might make me look bad.  I can take care of that all by myself.   

[Paul_Turner]

Re 12-15 at Pine Valley.  I guess you can look at this two ways.  Look for all the similarities or look for all the differences...depends on your perspective

Obviously 13 is quite different with the hole being extended so much.  14th obviously a new hole essentially parallel to the one on Colt's plan which would have been a similar length and dropping in nature.  From a routing sense, these were the biggest changes although they didn't necessitate a big rejigging of the general route and the blue plan is still about 80-85% correct.

The 15th on the blue plan is routed about right.  But the tee was pushed back when the lake was built and I know Tom Paul thinks the green was brought slightly forward from where it's drawn on that blue/red plan.

The 12th is roughly correct but the tee is farther down by the 11th green.

The 7th is interesting because the two options of straight and with a slight turn left for the green are shown on the stick routing.

[Paul_Turner]

One curiosity that's always bugged me...  Why does AWT describe the 2nd as a Spoon approach, in his report  prior to Colt's visit?  It doesn't make much sense considering where the ridge is and where the green was finally located.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Well, if you are going to knee jerk everything to fit in your agenda, have at it.

Jeff, you keep referencing my "agenda"  Would you define it for us ?

Since when are contemporaneous accounts not our best source?

When they're incorrect, biased and/or incomplete, which is often.
 

I hear you on the Crump suicide, however, I believe social values of the day dictated that grisly circumstances be avoided for society folk. 

Like "divorce" it carried a stigma, but, that's not justification for a systemic cover-up lasting nearly 90 years.

It just happened.  It has no bearing on the every day newspaper article devoted to informing golfers of goings on that interest them.
It didn't just happen, it was an orchestrated coverup involving numerous parties 

You might lie to avoid airing family laundry, but what possible purpose would AWT or others have in lying about the order of design?
YOU continue to couch errors, intentional or unintential as lying.
Obviously, never printing a correction on the true circumstances of GAC's death was a lie of omission.

As to the order of design, I'm not sure what you're referencing.

Ascertaining the factual dates will enable us to develop a reasoned chronology of events, one that would provide insight into the process that resulted in the design and construction of Pine Valley.

Some want to just accept the status quo even though they admit that the status quo, as reported by Finegan and Shelly has flaws.

Let's gather all of the facts, then make reasonable statements relating to the acquisition, design and construction of PV.

Why are some so afraid of the discovery process ?

BTW, sorry to hear about the eye procedures.  Are you an honorary member of Myopia by now?

Yes, and I want to thank you, as a fellow member, for sponsoring me.

[Patrick_Mucci]

As far as clearing and undergrowth, you need to read again the Tillnghast 1913 articles.

I did, Tillinghast said that the foresting was so thick that nature had hidden it from the eyes of mortals with timber and growth.
So, after almost 3 years from the purchase of the 184 acress, according to AWT, the woods and growth was so thick, the human eye didn't discern it or its value.  That seems pretty clear to me.

Did you read the last paragraph of the January 1915 article where it discussed the need to create a new 14th?

Yes, unlike others, and I won't mention names, I actually read these articles........ more than once.  

Again, it's tough to tell, but my read is that if they didn't know that the hole would be a par three in December 1914 when it was reported that a large lake would be built, but knew it in January 1915, it's tough to draw a conclusion on chicken versus egg in terms of whether the discovery of the 13th created the need to turn the bog into a lake, but it could certainly be read that way.  

I don't think that the order of "cause and effect" is critical, just informative in terms of how each came into being.

But, at this point, it would seem that the discovery of the 13th and the creation of the lake are inextricably entwined.
You could not have one without the other, and # 14 was the resulting natural and obvious connector that made it all possilble.

There's not much difference in terms of elapsed time between December 1914 and January 1915.

But, as more pieces of the puzzle are put in place, the chronology of events surrounding the design, creation and construction of PV becomes clearer.

I'm hoping that there's a date stamp on the dam works and that I can view it when I visit in October..
Public structures often have the equivalent of a cornerstone imbeded/stamped on a structure to signify the date of completion

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike, et. al.,

Joe's 1927 article seems to support one of my theories, namely that GAC worked at this project/land/design prior to 1913 and as early as from 1910 to 1912.

Could it be that Joe's 1927 article seems to indicate that GAC purchased and owned 300 acres upon which 184 were incorporated into Pine Valley in Oct/Nov of 1912, and that he was very familiar with this land, having hunted it extensively, before he purchased 300 acres ?

If that's true, it would explain how GAC could render a six hole routing by Feb 1913 only a few months after the 184 acre parcel was designated for PV.

Mike, it is NOT AT ALL supportive of the train myth, that's just your lame attempt to preserve the myth.

If he owned the land or had decided upon the land based on his extensive hunting on the land, he certainly didn't discover it just looking out the window, vis a vis a chance glance.  Besides, as Simon Carr and AWT have stated, the land was hidden by nature, covered in timber and dense undergrowth.  So you can toss your myth for several prudent reasons.

As to the sales date, that may be a date that GAC bifurcated the land, designating the 184 parcel for PV.

Was the Oct/Nov 1912 date the date of bifurcation/segregation ?

My question has been, and continues to be, "Why that specific 184 acres ?" 
There was equally great land nearby, as evidenced by the short course.
So, why that particular 184 acres.

As to your statement:  "In fact, they are the ONLY contemporaneous articles written that start this early in the project and follow closely and document the progress of Pine Valley up through his death and afterwards."

I don't know how you can make that claim.  You're automatically excluding any other articles that you do or don't know about.
Why the effort to close or shut off the discovery process ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

If Joe's article is correct, and I have some doubt, and GAC owned 300 acres, incorporating and designating 184 of those acres as the land PV would be sited on, in Oct/Nov 1912, it dramatically changes the development history of PV.

It would also indicate that those claiming that they know everything about PV, really don't know all of the material facts and details surrounding the creation of PV.

That's why the INDEPENDENT pursuit of the discovery process and exercising due diligence is critical to determining the true history of PV.

[DMoriarty]

Those dates also bring to mind the single report (presumed erroneous) that Colt had been to PV on his earlier trip.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Those dates also bring to mind the single report (presumed erroneous) that Colt had been to PV on his earlier trip.

David, remind me, when was his previous trip ?

[Mike Cirba]

I keep producing facts.  You guys keep producing...er...nothing, actually.

You are all way beyond sloppy and my suggestion for you all is to reconvene together in a nice, relaxing spot...perhaps take a hot whirlpool together for a few days and take some time to get your stories straight.

The history of the free world is depending on you!  .

Too funny.

[DMoriarty]

And there you have Mike Cirba's idea of a meaningful, factual post. Too bad he won't just stick to posting what Joe gives him to post.  
__________________________________

Patrick,  The dates of the three trips that I know of are as follows:

March 17, 1911. Arrived at New York from Liverpool (Toronto listed as destination.)
April 11, 1911. Arrived at Liverpool from New York

April 7 1913. Arrived at New York from Liverpool (Chicago listed as destination.)
June 9 1913. Arrived at Plymouth from New York

April 23 1914. Arrived at Boston from Liverpool (Montreal listed as destination.)
May 18 1914. Arrived at Liverpool from Montreal

____________________________

Hawtree's book apparently indicated that Colt consulted at Pine Valley on his 1911 trip, but this claim has been dismissed because Crump supposedly didn't purchase the land until late 1912.

[Tom MacWood]

As for almost all the articles being yours, that doesn't surprise me.   What I wonder though, is why more articles crediting Colt with the layout do not make it to gca.com?  I've come across quite a few of them and I am sure you have too.  I trust you would agree that was quite a long period of time where most of the mentions primarily credited Colt.  Yet most of the articles that make it to CBM are only those discussing Crump.    Is this your editorial decision, or is it Mike's?  
 

David
That is a good question, but in fairness JB has produced several articles crediting Colt too. But I don't doubt he feels some pressure to get the story right, if you know what I mean. I recall the delay in getting out the article that reported Barker had been hired at Merion. I am certain he was encouraged not share that with the group, but it was eventually shared.

I've found the majority of contemporaneous reports (if not all) give credit to Colt for the design of PVGC, including William Evans, JE Ford, Findlay, Carr, Tilly, Travis, Travers, Colt, Alison, Sayers and Grantland Rice. After Crump's death GAC progressively got more credit, and Colt less.

[Tom MacWood]

One curiosity that's always bugged me...  Why does AWT describe the 2nd as a Spoon approach, in his report  prior to Colt's visit?  It doesn't make much sense considering where the ridge is and where the green was finally located.

I wondered about that too. Assuming the first hole is in the same place, the tee location for the second is set, which would means that green would have been located at a different spot, and if that is the case, the third was probably quite different, etc.

[Mike Cirba]

If Colt arrived early April in 1913, then why didn't he make it to PV until  the end of May, if that was indeed his priority?

[Tom MacWood]

“If the stick routing  was superimposed on the topo circa March 1913, then we know it had to be done on  or subsequent to March 1903. The question remains, WHEN was the stick routing  superimposed on the March 1913 Topo ?” To the question  above an observer would like to offer the following: The  surveyor/map-maker date on the so-called Crump stick routing says "Topographical  Plan of the Property of George A Crump, Camden  County, New  Jersey, March,  1913"
Therefore that map  was probably in Crump’s hands at some point in March and at least by the  beginning of April. That gave Crump (et al) seven weeks to two months to work on  a routing with it before Colt first arrived.
Colt arrived in the end of May or beginning of June 1913 and stayed at PV for a week (mentioned in various reports. I also believe that Colt and Mrs Colt stayed with Mr and Mrs Hugh I. Wilson in Philadelphia before he spent that week with Crump at Pine Valley and that Colt looked over Merion and Seaview. I also believe Wilson stayed with Colt  when touring England for architecture in March/April 1912. My source for deducing that is a letter Colt wrote to Wilson in the early 1920s).
The reason I believe  Crump worked on that initial stick routing and probably finished it and then put  it away when Colt arrived are these:
    1.  Tillinghast  described a few of the first holes of Pine Valley in a periodical in the May  1913 issue, which means to me that Tillinghast derived his information and  then wrote his article in April 1913.
    2. Colt  apparently always drew with a light blue pencil and there are no light blue lines on that initial stick routing, at least I am quite sure there aren’t but I will be going back down there to check that item.  
    1.  I believe  when Colt arrived a fresh copy of the March 1913 topo map was used and that  was what Colt began to put his blue line  Pine Valley routing  on. The Crump stick  routing shows the first four holes are as they were built.
  
#5 was from the  present tee to a green in the hill side to the left of
today’s hole  approximately where the driveway turns left to go up to the cl
ubhouse. It was a  shortish drop shot par 3.
From that spot there  were two iterations on the map for #6. One went from
about mid #5 up over the  ridge (right about over Ewing’s house because it  
was not there and neither was the road) to a green about where #6 is today;
It  may’ve been a par 5 concept. The other iteration for #6 was from a tee
near that  shorter left #5 green up over the ridge to the left of #18 to a
green  approximately where #10 green is today; a par 4.
#7 was from a tee to  the right of #10 green to a green approximately where John Ott’s house is to the  left of today’s #9 fairway; a par 4.
#8 was today’s #6; a  par 4.
#9 was essentially  today’s #7; a par 5 probably.
#10 was essentially  today’s #12 except it was slightly to the right and appears to have been a quite  long par 3.
#11 was from a tee  around or slightly behind today’s right #13 tee to a green to the right and well  short of today’s #13 green.
#12 came down over  the ridge to a green approximately at the beginning of today’s #15 fairway; a  fairly long par 3.
#13 went back up and  over the ridgeline between today’s #13 and #15 to a green quite near today’s #12  green; a medium length par 4.
#14 came back down  the ridge parallel to #13 to a green on today’s #15 fairway about 300 plus yards  off today’s #15 tee; a medium length par 4.
#15 was from a tee  somewhat less than midway up today’s #15 to a green approximately where today’s  #11 green is and probably a bit to the right of it; apparently a very long par  4.  
#16 was a long par 5  from a tee to the right of today’s #11 green to a green site at approximately  today’s #16 green or perhaps slightly farther on.
#17 was today’s #17  except perhaps slightly to the left (its green seemed to be pretty much directly  behind today’s #10 green) and at 385 longer than today’s #17 probably because  the tee was behind today’s waterworks behind #17 tee because at that point the  waterworks was not there because the lake on #14, #15 and #16 was not  there.
#18 was today’s  #18.
Did Crump do this routing perhaps with some help and collaboration from his friends and new  members? Well if you believe, as I do, what the following note says and means, I  think any logical or reasonable mind (which frankly GOLFCLUBATLAS.com has many of these day although not all) it is hard to conclude that this stick routing was not Crump or Crump completely in control or holding the editorship of this  project and its routing, design and development.
Don’t forget, at this point,  George Crump owned the property himself, and for the rest of his short life he owned most of the rest of it through his anonymous bond purchases!
To wit-----Crump’s  notation on the top of this early stick routing superimposed on top of the  original topo map of March 1913: “Am not sure if the  greens are marked on this map Where I marked them  on the ground” GAC
That note is in Crump’s handwriting. I believe it says and means that at that point he probably  wasn’t very good at using a topo map or figuring out how to specifically  correlate the contour lines on the topo map with the same spots on the ground  (this writer commiserates with that dilemma having spent about two years and  about 1,000 hours routing and designing a course in Philadelphia and never being  very comfortable with the use of his topo contour map).
By the way, the contours lines are five feet elevations and I think the map is in 1”=200 ft scale or close to it.
I believe when Colt  arrived at the end of May or the beginning of June 1913 Crump put away this topo  map stick routing with his iterations and changes on it and broke out a fresh  copy for Colt on which Colt put his routing on it in light blue pencil using a  number of Crump’s holes and coming up with some of his own  iterations. I think the major  changes Colt made was to create the much longer version of the famous #5 (which  I believe was one of the keys to unraveling some of the previous routing Crump  had with his original stick routing), to slide the green for #7 well short and  to the left of Crump’s iteration, to create the short par 4 #8, the long par 4  #9, the short par 3 #10, the par 4 #11 in its present position, a longer version  of #12 than is there today with a tee just short and very close to today’s #11  green, a shorter version of #13 (280-300 yards), a shorter version of #15 and a  version of #16 that may’ve been a par 5 in the position of the present #16 but  which was a much shorter tee version of Crump’s stick iteration of #16 which was  a long par 5 (by the way, according to his friends, at the very end Crump was  struggling with what to do with #15 and also wanted to go back to his original  par 5 #16; there is a totally unique and remarkable balance and variety structure Crump seem to get into later (around 1914) which I will try to explain and describe some other time). I think Colt’s #4 may’ve been a shortish par 5  and it was routed slightly to the right of the present hole because Colt’s 2nd green was approximately 30 yards left of today’s #2 green and  almost into the left side of today’s 4th fairway which according to  one of Crump’s friends Crump said ‘No Good” (about the left placement of #2’s  green). By the way, Crump’s favorite holes, according to his friends, were #2  and #18. Colt’s 3rd tee was just about in the middle of today’s  2nd green. And then Colt left  never to return to Pine Valley. Following his visit Crump began to change the holes and put his red lines on the “Blue/Red Line”  topo map (and some other lead pencil lines on the map) for close to the next  four years.
That “Blue/Red Line  topo map hung on the wall in the clubhouse for what could be up to 90 years now  but not until about 2001 did someone begin to figure out what the blue lines  meant and whose they were and whose the red lines and others were and when, and  the routing and design puzzle between Colt and Crump began to be revealed and  the architectural attribution between the two became more  clear.
Colt also left a hole  by hole flip-top booklet of the individual holes of his routing with some text  instructions on them. The holes of that booklet  almost perfectly match the blue  lines on the “Blue/Red Line” topo and they both match the so-called Pine Valley course map of July  1913 that says on it “as suggested by Harry Colt.”
I believe Crump gave his map  maker the blue line topo and the Colt hole by hole booklet and asked him to make  that map.
That’s the map we bought on EBay about 2005. It was found some years ago in a flea market sale in Clementon and bought for $56. We bought if from the EBay seller about five minutes before the gavel for 15 grand and turned it over  to Pine Valley were it now hangs in copy.When Crump died on Jan 24, 1918 only fourteen holes  were in play. #12-#15 were in one state of development or another and they would not come into play until 1921 when the full Pine Valley 18 hole course would be completed eight years after it began. Before that the club played and 18 hole course by playing 1 through 11, then #16, #17 and #18 and  then #1 through #4 over again and you were right back at the clubhouse.

The portion highlighted is either conjecture, speculation or theory. As you can plainly see his account, which is presented as factual, is mostly fiction. He ignores the fact that the original plan was for 18 men (of limited architectural experience) to design 18 holes. And that 18 men design idea was intact right through April 1913, just prior to Colt arriving the next month. He ignores the fact that most contemporaneous reports credit Colt with the design, including Colt himself.

[Tom MacWood]

If Colt arrived early April in 1913, then why didn't he make it to PV until  the end of May, if that was indeed his priority?

Who is speculating Colt prioritized PV or any other project? 

[Mike Cirba]

If he was here in 1911 and saw the property it would have been.

[Tom MacWood]

What? You are now speculating Crump had decided on the site in 1911?

By the way you did not answer my previous question. Who is speculating Colt prioritized PV or any other project?

[Mike Cirba]

Let me first make clear that Joe Bausch has given me nothing to post for him.

All of the articles of his that I've posted on this, and many other threads, were already out in the GCA public domain, put there by Joe on other threads, and I copied it forward here.

I estimated 90% overall jokingly, but it's probably more like 50-60% overall on my posts, depending on the topic.   This one is "Joe-heavy" simply because the only direct, eye-witness account through all the years starting around the time the property was purchased is AW Tillinghast, and Joe is the one who unearthed the Tillinghast Series of Articles from the Philadelphia Record.

That, of course, is why you guys are so desperate to discredit him.   That part is particularly pathetic, as are comments such as Patrick's that Crump killed himself because he hadn't yet finished the last four holes, which is not only pure speculation, but totally disgraceful.

It was the middle of World War I....there was a LOT going on and Crump's dream and mental state need to be viewed with some modicum of respect.

But that's not going to happen.   You guys will simply go to about any length to push your agenda.

With all Joe Bausch has done for this site you guys are now throwing him under the bus because I've used some of his articles that's he's previously posted here??

That's really, really sad and at least David should be very ashamed of himself.   But, he won't be, I'm also certain.

Besides, despite David's new theory to the contrary, I've also used articles that discuss Colt's role, such as the 1928 J.E. Ford article on my post #26 on this thread.

Tillinghast also mentioned Colt coming, and then what was the result, and I've posted those, as well.    Here they are again.






NO ONE is trying to take Colt out of the equation.   You guys are simply trying to write Crump out of the equation, which is why the contemporaneous record laid out by Tillnghast is so important.

And, thank God for Tillinghast writing what he did at both Pine Valley and Merion or who knows how f-up'd you guys would have their history by now.

And thank God for Joe Bausch for finding these articles that stand on their own no matter how you guys try to twist them, or how much you try to discredit the man himself.