Pine Valley and Topos

[JESII]

Pat,

The idea to change 13 had an immediate impact on the 14th hole...forcing it to be changed...would you agree?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Certainly Tillinghast, who claims he helped lay out PV, said that 14 was wrought by the discovery of the 13th.

[JESII]

Pat,

Please follow my logic:

In American Golfer, December 1914 issue, this is what Tillinghast wrote;

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.

As of December 1914 the 14th hole is a par 4 with a mashie approach and the club has already decided to dam the swamp.

Here is what Tillinghast wrote, published 1//10/1915;

By January they've discovered the 13th green site which necessitates changing the 14th to a par 3.

Is this debateable?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim & Mike,

First, the date something is written doesn't signify the date something was thought of.

You guys must be dense, we know that the revised 13th resulted in a revision to the 14th

Didn't you read my 1:15 pm and 4:18 pm replies today ?

That's not the issue.

The issue is, which came first, the IDEA to convert the swamp to a lake or the IDEA to extend the 13th hole, or were they a subset of the general concept of # 13, 14 and 15 ?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

You're on your own here. 

[Steve Burrows]

The issue is, which came first, the IDEA to convert the swamp to a lake or the IDEA to extend the 13th hole, or were they a subset of the general concept of # 13, 14 and 15 ?

Congratulations, Pat.  I just slogged through this thread to see what was going on and it seems you just took an already senseless discourse and made it completely futile.  From a guy who claims to be looking for "facts," now you're hoping to find evidence of when "ideas" occurred?   Bon chance!

[JESII]

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.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Good luck with that.

Steve is dead-on correct.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Sullivan,

I already indicated same in previous replies, I even provided the time they were posted.
Please reread replies #'s 934 and 949.
What don't you understand in those replies ?

Steve Burrows,

Would you then tell us, which came first, the idea to convert the swamp into a lake or the idea to extend the 13th hole ?
Could you give us the dates for each /

Certainly they seem inextricably entwined, but, it would be nice to be able to determine which came first.
Just because someone chose to write about them in a certain order doesn't mean that that order represents how and when the ideas were conceived.  If you can't understand the desire or need to establish that order in order to properly record history, that's your problem.

Mike, as usual, you applaud the inane and obfuscate the significant.

[Mike Cirba]

Pat, the ONLY evidence we have of which came first shows that the idea of the lake came first.

Now, could the 13th discovery, with Tilly there in person, have happened prior to the Dec article where he writes that the lake will be built yet still the 14th is listed as a par four?

Probably not.

[Steve Burrows]

If you can't understand the desire or need to establish that order in order to properly record history, that's your problem.

Pat, at what point was the idea first conceived for America to declare independence from the British?  It was certainly before July 4, 1776, yes?.  Your logic would suggest that because of this deficiency, we do not properly know American history.  But the reality is that we will probably never know when the idea was hatched, nor would knowledge of such a detail would materially change how we understand that history.

Similarly, even if you found the information you seek for this example at Pine Valley (though you are likely searching for a ghost, because I imagine that the "idea" was never documented), I suspect the impact of those findings would be relatively insignificant.  It wouldn't really change the way that we understand the early development of golf course design methodology.   Do you honestly believe that these potential findings would SUBSTANTIALLY (and I would ask you to seriously consider this word in capital letters) change the way we understand how topographical maps were used to route/design early American golf courses?   

[DMoriarty]

If you can't understand the desire or need to establish that order in order to properly record history, that's your problem.

Pat, at what point was the idea first conceived for America to declare independence from the British?  It was certainly before July 4, 1776, yes?.  Your logic would suggest that because of this deficiency, we do not properly know American history.  But the reality is that we will probably never know when the idea was hatched, nor would knowledge of such a detail would materially change how we understand that history.

I think this example may cut against your position.  While we may commemorate the date, from a historical perspective how we got to that point is much more important that the date of the Declaration.  
_____________________________________

Patrick,

Perhaps if you could determine the precise reasons for the lake, that would answer your question.   The December 1914 article notes the lake will be "attractive," but was this the reason?

[Patrick_Mucci]

If you can't understand the desire or need to establish that order in order to properly record history, that's your problem.

Pat, at what point was the idea first conceived for America to declare independence from the British?  It was certainly before July 4, 1776, yes?.  Your logic would suggest that because of this deficiency, we do not properly know American history.  But the reality is that we will probably never know when the idea was hatched, nor would knowledge of such a detail would materially change how we understand that history.

Rather than review the history of the U.S., let's confine the discussion to Pine Valley.

The best example I can offer, regarding the genesis or date of an idea/concept at Pine Valley would be the 5th hole.
Originally, the 5th hole was configured differently, but, we know that a revised and final configuration took form sometime between late May and early June of 1913 when Colt visited and made the suggestion.  So, it's not beyond the realm of reason to think that perhaps the genesis or date that the concept of converting the swamp to a lake is ascertainable.   The same could be said about the extension of the 13th hole, from it's original configuration to its final configuration.

It would also be informative to learn if one triggered the other or if they were independent of one another.

Your resistance to wanting to learn of the chronological order of development is puzzling and perhaps rooted in other motives.

Similarly, even if you found the information you seek for this example at Pine Valley (though you are likely searching for a ghost, because I imagine that the "idea" was never documented), I suspect the impact of those findings would be relatively insignificant. 

No, I think it would be both informative and significant.


It wouldn't really change the way that we understand the early development of golf course design methodology. 

Sure it would, it would tell us how the dilema GAC faced with respect to finishing the course was solved, step by step. 

Do you honestly believe that these potential findings would SUBSTANTIALLY (and I would ask you to seriously consider this word in capital letters) change the way we understand how topographical maps were used to route/design early American golf courses? 

Those are two seperate subjects.

Do you think the motive for your snotty note will SUBSTANTIALLY change the way we look at the 18th green without the pimple at PV ?

again, Both are seperate subjects.

What I don't understand is, why wouldn't you want to know if one concept inspired the others ? 

[Steve Burrows]

I think this example may cut against your position.  While we may commemorate the date, from a historical perspective how we got to that point is much more important that the date of the Declaration.  

David,

Admittedly, knowing how we got to that point is important, but it is a fool's errand to believe that we could ever track down the precise moment when Revolution was conceived.  All we can ever know with any degree of certainty is what was documented, and even this is perhaps sketchy.  This means we know what Jefferson, or Adams, or the Continental Congress may have written down, but what about the thoughts of some yeoman farmer 100 years before?  Unfortunately, we are hardly inclined to give credence to this possibility because we have no way of knowing if such a thing ever happened.

The quest for discovering when Crump, or anyone else, had an "idea" for making a change to the routing, or turn the bog into a lake, as opposed to discovering when it was documented, then, is equally sisyphean.

[Dan Herrmann]

It is a nice looking lake

[Tom MacWood]

Jim,

Certainly Tillinghast, who claims he helped lay out PV, said that 14 was wrought by the discovery of the 13th.

I don't recall Tilly describing the present 14th at all. When did he do that?

[Tom MacWood]

The following Feburary, 1914 Philadelphia Inquirer article points out that the PV men greatly admired the philosophies of Herbert Fowler who argued for more stringent shot-making on golf courses, and while they also greatly respected Colt, there was likely some disagreement on how tough to make the course at Pine Valley.   I would suggest that Crump won out.

How do you know they greatly admired the philosophies of Fowler? Where did you read Fowler argued for more stringent shot-making?

[Tom MacWood]

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.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I don't recall who wrote that first PV article about Fowler that I had in my files...it may have been Tillinghast...I'll check with Joe.

In any case, if you re-read the bottom paragraph on the left hand column you'll note the author mentions that Fowler prefers courses with no letup in their demands, or at least that's the author's perspective.

He states:

"Fowler, like two or three Americans, is an amateur who turned links architect and eternally  yearns for the ideal, leaning towards a severity that scarcely gives one time to catch breath.  Some of his notions are well worthy of consideration, but the conception of many American players have gained of him conforms roughly to that of the idyllic Bunthorne, the poet of Gilbert and Sullivan's "Patience".

Here is another article, this by Verdant Greene, that describes their admiration of Fowler.   It also discusses Fowler's ideal of at least four par threes;




Here again is the one I posted prior;

[Tom MacWood]

You are reading far too much into that little blurb. First of all I would not describe Fowler's architecture as overly penal. He favored deep bunkers, but he also took into account the fate of the rank and file golfer. By 1914 he had designed Walton Heath-New, Walton Heath-Old, Yelverton, West Surrey, Delamere Forest, Bexhill, Woodcote Park, Beau Desert, San Sebastian, and redesigned a number of courses including Westward Ho!, Southerndown, Fixby, Deauville and Dieppe. I would not describe any of those courses as overtly penal.

What Crump and Smith were looking at was an article written by Fowler in 1913 about his idea for an ideal golf course, with accompanying drawings. To say they were disciples of Fowler is a major stretch IMO.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Whoever Verdant Greene and the other author were, they certainly seemed to believe that these guy were major disciples of a school of architecture exemplified by Fowler in which their was no letup of challenge, which was one of the tenets of the Pine Valley founders, as well.

They wore out the article(s?) so much that they kept them under glass.

I would suggest that was someone who was there.

[Tom MacWood]

You are exaggerating. They admired Fowler's article; it is very interesting article and design. But to say based on this little blurb that they were major disciples as a big stretch IMO. By the time the article was written Colt has already designed the course so obviously Fowler had no influence on that. And if they were such major disciples of Fowler wouldn't there have been an incorporation of his ideas into the course, perhaps in the form of modifications here and there? Have you found any evidence of that?


Where did you read about Fowler no let up philosophy? Are you just making this stuff up as you go along?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Certainly the number, intensity, and severity of the hole intern hazards at PV seem far more penal than anything seen on Colt's drawings.

I'm not saying that was due to the influence of Fowler's philosophy, but the author certainly seems to think so.

How would you contrast the styles and themes of Colt and Fowler up to that time?

[Mike Cirba]

By the way, Tom...do we know what Colt thought of the whole "ideal links" concept, where every single hole was desired to be a great, challenging hole within a larger set of ideal principles?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Certainly the number, intensity, and severity of the hole intern hazards at PV seem far more penal than anything seen on Colt's drawings.

I'm not saying that was due to the influence of Fowler's philosophy, but the author certainly seems to think so.

How would you contrast the styles and themes of Colt and Fowler up to that time?

Do you make this stuff? Where did you come up with Fowler's never let up philosophy?

Colt designed a number of heavily bunkered courses, and the PV site was wall to wall sand. To claim Colt's design for PV was not heavily bunkered is idiotic. It would be impossible to design a course on that site without sand influencing nearly every shot.

You are the one claiming you know Fowler's philosophy, you tell us how they differed.