Mike Cirba, Despite your self-righteous indignation in your latest few posts, I don't think it is all that complicated, nor do I think your interpretation is the most reasonable one.
Regarding your post 1052, I view all those quotes in the context in which they were presented. CBM had already mentioned or provided examples of ("for instance") six hole locations (what he termed "opportunities") and the general shape of the course. So when he wrote "distances and the holes to be reproduced will be decided on by the committee in the next five months," he obviously did not mean that this process had not started yet.
Rather he meant that it has not been finally completed, and it had not.
Likewise regarding "the exact lines." Obviously they already had a good idea of the lines, but the process had not yet been finalized. For you to read it as if they hadn't started narrowing things down is ludicrous given what CBM had already told us!
And yes, I to think it sounds like what CBM described in Scotland's gift. After the fact, CBM doesn't dwell on what happened over that winter, and I don't think that is an oversight on his part. It was winter. They had a very good idea on how the course fit before they secured it, and they probably put that idea into a workable form over the winter and spring while working out some of the details, and then they built the course.
I find it interesting that over 20 years later CBM would describe finding those same exact four holes shortly after recounting how he and Whigham rode horseback over it "2 or 3 times" studying landforms to determine if it was what they wanted. Remarkable.
Not really all that remarkable if you look at the rest of Scotland's Gift. If you have read as much of the history as I have, then even you must have started to notice that many of the details in Scotland's Gift also appeared in contemporaneous newspaper accounts and/or various other reports. The details are so accurate that my guess the CBM or someone close to him kept copious notes, a scrapbook or clip book, or perhaps even a journal. He obviously wasn't pulling all that detail from under his hat. So it isn't remarkable to me that his account would be similar to newspaper accounts of the time. Plus, these were all still very famous holes when he wrote his book, and key components of his design approach. So why not mention them again?
Similar is the coincidence in him subsequently securing 200 acres that December just happened to match the exact amount he proposed in the Founders agreement.
This is a bad habit of yours. You just can't assume direct causation because you don't want to accept that something might have been a coincidence. He needed those 200 acres for the course he invisioned. Actually he needed 205. And that is what he bought. Coincidence? I don't think so. I think he bought what needed, just like he said he did.
If you really want to find a reason to link the 200 acres purchase to the 1904 letter, consider the finances. He anticipated that land would not cost more than 40 or 50 thousand dollars. He ended up spending $45,000 for "Cost of land and surveying, legal expenses, etc." Note that "surveying" was included in the section for purchase of the property, and not under the section including the costs of building the course.