[DMoriarty]

Personal insult?  I must have missed it.   Besides, this isn't personal, Mike.  I am just commenting on your various theories.  Bill is the one who called your latest theory a pile of crap.   And I haven't railed at each and every post. I have commented (and will continue to comment) on some of the posts that don't really make sense.  Unfortunately, there have been a very large number of those.  

Now, will you ever explain why CBM would have measured the exact distance between the Inn and the first tee?  

Before answering, take a pause and really think about the question.  Why do you insist that he would have needed an exact yardage on the walk to the tee?  

[MCirba]

David,

That response came in 8 minutes.  

I've had stalkers pay me less attention than you do. 

Really...go for a walk.  Play golf.  Spend some time with your family.

What I write here really isn't nearly as important as you're making it.  Really.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

It's been several days !

Please answer the very simple question I posed to you, despite how painful it might be.0

If the model was created prior to April, 1908, wouldn't that prove that CBM always intended the clubhouse to be sited where it currently sits ?

[DMoriarty]

Mike, and yours came in 19.  Whenever you are struggling with the argument you start claiming I am picking on you and telling  me how to live my life. I assure you you no nothing of my life. How about we stick to the issues?  Or, if you want to pontificate without comment or critique, then stick to your offsite email chains. 

Now, about that question you keep ducking . . .

[MCirba]

Mike,

It's been several days !

Please answer the very simple I posed to you, despite how painful it might be.0

If the model was created prior to April, 1908, wouldn't that prove that CBM always intended the clubhouse to be sited where it currently sits ?

Pat,

It depends.  I have no idea if that model was created in a single iteration or if it was added to and/or modified over time.  

I'd really like to see it up close, frankly, because my aging eyes have a difficult time making out much from Sven's blurry picture.  

I've only been to NGLA three times but the first was the best.  A lovely 70 degree early November day as the only two on the course with Mike Rewinski as my guide, eye-balling distances without a hint of yardage.

I can guarantee you that I didn't try to drive the green directly on 14, even if Macdonald said it was only a 240 yard carry to the green.

Second most memorable was playing Sebonack in the morning followed by National in the afternoon, playing downwind on the way out and into a brilliant fall sunset coming home into that same constant headwind where I hit almost every inward shot on the middle of the clubface.  Making par on 5 of the last six holes was exhilerating,!

I honestly don't have any strong opinion regarding your theory of where the clubhouse was intended except to say that your initial  post is incongruous.

[MCirba]

David,

I've answered your question twice.  If you don't agree that's fine, you never do simply because it's me.  It's become...hmmm...expected.

I'm curious if you've been to NGLA?   It's ok if you havent, I'm not going to berate you as Patrick does to Bryan and others, but after all of this discussion I'm  intellectually curious.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

It's been several days !

Please answer the very simple I posed to you, despite how painful it might be.0

If the model was created prior to April, 1908, wouldn't that prove that CBM always intended the clubhouse to be sited where it currently sits ?

Pat,

It depends.  I have no idea if that model was created in a single iteration or if it was added to and/or modified over time.  

Mike, That's irrelevant.
If it was made prior to April, 1908 it doesn't matter if  it was a single sitting or 1,000 sittings.
It's the fact that it was completed before the fire that's the relevant aspect.

I'd really like to see it up close, frankly, because my aging eyes have a difficult time making out much from Sven's blurry picture.  

Again, irrelevant

I've only been to NGLA three times but the first was the best.  A lovely 70 degree early November day as the only two on the course with Mike Rewinski as my guide, eye-balling distances without a hint of yardage.

You're avoiding the question again

I can guarantee you that I didn't try to drive the green directly on 14, even if Macdonald said it was only a 240 yard carry to the green.

More diversionary tactics

Second most memorable was playing Sebonack in the morning followed by National in the afternoon, playing downwind on the way out and into a brilliant fall sunset coming home into that same constant headwind where I hit almost every inward shot on the middle of the clubface.  Making par on 5 of the last six holes was exhilerating,!

Agreed, but, irrelevant

I honestly don't have any strong opinion regarding your theory of where the clubhouse was intended except to say that your initial  post is incongruous.

I'm not asking for the strength of your opinion.
I'm asking, "if the model was created prior to April, 1908, the date the Shinnecock Inn burned down, isn't that proof that CBM always intended to site his clubhouse where it currently sits ?

Yes or No ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

I've answered your question twice.  If you don't agree that's fine, you never do simply because it's me.  It's become...hmmm...expected.

I'm curious if you've been to NGLA?   It's ok if you havent, I'm not going to berate you as Patrick does to Bryan and others, but after all of this discussion I'm  intellectually curious.

Mike,

There's a difference.
Bryan offers his opinions as fact, when time after time he's been contradictory with his opinions or just flat out wrong.

You do remember him declaring that there were no roads in 1906 and subsequently declaring that there was a network of roads prior to 1906, don't you ?

You and Bryan seem to have convenient, selective memories.

[MCirba]

Pat,

Bryan and I have had numerous disagreements here but never have I doubted his sincere intent to seek objective truth.

I'm all for good and healthy debate here but this villainization of those who disagree with you and/or David on the slightest point is really disgraceful.

You and David may have chased others like professional architect Jeff Brauer from this discussion with repeated insults and abuse but Pat..I respect and like you personally and know you're better than that.  If your arguments are sound you really shouldn't have to sink to these levels.
 

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

Sorry if this seems like piling on at the moment, but I think your interpretation of the 200 - 300 yards Macdonald quote is a bit stretched.

"A modern inn is being built within 200 or 300 yards of our first tee by outside interests."

Your interpretation,

And, if he hadn't yet determined by December 1906 if his first tee was going to be 2 football fields or 3 football fields away from the Inn that was being constructed he probably hadn't routed and determined his first hole yet.

I do see that you used "probably", so I understand that you are not drawing an absolute conclusion.


IF Macdonald had said, "A modern inn is being built within 282 yards of the back of our first tee by outside interests." THEN I think we could all say that CBM knew exactly where the Inn and his 1st tee were at that moment in time.

You seem to be using the converse - IF he didn't know the exact measure THEN he didn't know where his 1st tee was going to be because he hadn't routed the course yet.

However, there are a number of other plausible logical reasons why he did not use an exact measure.

1.  He might have forgotten the exact yardage during the interview.

2.  He might not have measured it.

3.  He might not have cared exactly how far it was because either 200 or 300 yards was close enough for him.

4.  He might not have cared about the SI, because the members would be most often walking from the locker/bath house that would be closer


You're entitled to your opinion but there are other more plausible interpretations in my opinion.


For whatever it's worth, the middle of the current 1st tee is about 200 yards from the front door of the current clubhouse and 300 yards from the middle of the current parking lot.  I guess 200 - 300 yards was not too far.

[Bryan Izatt]

Some more questions.


Why did Macdonald include in his 1907 purchase of 205 acres the almost 6 acres to the south of the current 9th green?


Having bought it as part of the parcel, why didn't he use it for anything?


Money seemed to be a concern at the time, so why buy the land and then not use it for anything?

[MCirba]

Bryan,

I think he would have been very aware of the distance but understand and respect your point.  And I am speculating based on very little evidence here, as are we all.  I'm siding with my sense that Macdonald was very scientific and precise in his approach to everything related to his golf course.

[DMoriarty]

David,

I've answered your question twice.

No. You've twice went on about how the relative location of the clubhouse was important, but you have never explained why CBM would have needed an exact measure as opposed to an approximate idea of the distance.

If you don't agree that's fine, you never do simply because it's me.  It's become...hmmm...expected.

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps I disagree with you because I think you are wrong?  Did you ever notice that when I do disagree with you, it often turns out that you are, in fact, wrong?  You can wave the martyr flag all you like, but one only need consider the unreasonable positions you've taken over the years to realize that you have brought my disagreement upon yourself.  

I'm curious if you've been to NGLA?   It's ok if you havent, I'm not going to berate you as Patrick does to Bryan and others, but after all of this discussion I'm  intellectually curious.

You are intellectually curious, are you? Nice try at trolling, Mike, but yes, I have played NGLA. I just don't feel the need to wax on about my game when my game has nothing to do with the history of the course.

I'm all for good and healthy debate here but this villainization of those who disagree with you . . .

Oh, this is rich coming from you, Mike.  You and your sleazy buddies have been trying to "villain-ize" me on and off this website ever since I dared point out some factual problems with some certain legends, and you are still at it today.  Look at your posts immediately above, where you try to pretend this is all about me picking on you and not about the substantive issues. What is that except for your latest attempt to "villain-ize" me?

[Gib_Papazian]

Attention Squabbling Kindergarteners,

While neither I - nor the Emperor - have waded through this avalanche of accusatory invective, obtuse speculation and argumentative horseshit, I'd like to point out amidst this juvenile taffy pull that we (along with Jeff "I'm was a plus 3.75, but struggling to play to a plus 2" Fortson) all made the same observation Saturday night regarding the steaming chasm between this syphilitic, 55 page circular argument and simple logic regarding Roaring 20's amenities like yacht docking and golf practice areas - not to mention the cat house across Bullhead Bay for the head bulls.

This lunacy has the peculiar odor of a proxy war between a pair of warring lurkers who need to grow up, file your points and authorities - and let somebody else have the last word. Never thought I would see anything more absurd than the Merion thread . . . . . . .

Take a step back for a minute, read what I wrote above, think it through from the perspective of what was important to men like C.B. Mac., Judge Morgan O'Brien and Findlay Douglas and get back to me about this insane argument about placement of the clubhouse.

Occam's Razor.
    

[MCirba]

David,

Find someone else to argue with.

Despite repeated warnings from many others I tried to have a civil conversation with you.

I was an idiot and won't repeat that error.  The only way to put out a fire is to deprive it of oxygen.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

Bryan and I have had numerous disagreements here but never have I doubted his sincere intent to seek objective truth.

Mike,

Again, you refuse to answer the question I asked you and once again attempt to divert/deflect away from that question.  
So, answer my question and stop the B.S.
this isn't about you and Bryan

I'm all for good and healthy debate here but this villainization of those who disagree with you and/or David on the slightest point is really
I happen to like Bryan, but he's being agenda driven, as you sometimes are.
As Bill brightly stated, you/Bryan have draw your conclusions and are desperately seeking facts to support your agenda.disgraceful.

You and David may have chased others like professional architect Jeff Brauer from this discussion with repeated insults and abuse but Pat..I respect and like you personally and know you're better than that.  

Mike, Jeff Brauer is no shrinking violet and has conducted himself no differently then anyone else, so please, let's not hold him up as a paragon of virtue.

If your arguments are sound you really shouldn't have to sink to these levels.

When I have to ask you the same question a dozen times and you refuse to answer it, how does that contribute to having sound debates.

You have a pattern of not answering question due to your agenda/s.

David and I have a pattern of answering all of the questions we're asked.

Once again you're avoiding answering the question by diversionary tactics and that's being disingenuous
 

[MCirba]

Gib,

I write and speak for myself, thanks.  

Speaking of proxy, I instinctively figured that coming back here I'd be a target-by-proxy, standing in to catch the residual fire directed at folks long-gone from this site.   I thought, hey, no biggie...I'll just keep it civil and discuss history, and golf courses, and present facts and opinions and what's the worst that can happen?    

I was encouraged by Ran's post at the beginning of the year asking folks to step up their game here, as well as inspired to come back seeing some of the terrific research being done by Sven and some others.

The funny thing is that if I see Wayne or Tom more than once or twice a year these days that's a lot.   Yes, I get the group emails, big deal.   I think you guys are forgetting that I'm a public-course guy who doesn't run in those circles.    

I'm here for my own reasons.

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

As ill brightly stated, you/Bryan have draw your conclusions and are desperately seeking facts to support your agenda.

Is Bill sick?  Sorry to hear that if he is.


Bill directed his comments to Mike alone.  You have misrepresented them to include me.  If you had read the article on the ten signs of intellectual honesty you would know that you just breached sign 8. "When addressing an argument, do not misrepresent it."


Now if you follow your usual modus operandi you will breach sign 5. "Be willing to publicly acknowledge when you are wrong."

[Gib_Papazian]

#1. I know exactly who is lurking, so please don’t insult my intelligence. It is somebody who - although he has serious differences with another Treehouse friend I idolize - is a fine gentleman and scholar. The historical truth about this polarizing discussion is likely somewhere in the middle.  

#2. To paraphrase Eric Hoffer, who opined that WWII was not a separate event, but really a continuation of WWI, this discussion is just a continuation of the Merion thread.

#3. Somewhere, Uncle George, Macdonald, Raynor and Judge O’Brien are looking down at this thread laughing at all of you.

#4. Nothing in history occurred in a vacuum - everybody, whether directly, indirectly, by example or viscerally, built upon the foundation of previous ideas. Think about that for a minute.

And as you idiots chase your tails around the Sambo tree, here is a little perspective for you. The last time I saw Bernhardt, Katie drove him by our film set on their way to Pebble Beach. By that time, he had withered to nothing on a feeding tube and struggling to breathe.

John, who could once golf and drink everybody under the table, quickly started to tire and I helped him to the car, promising to see him soon - but knowing I’d never see my friend again. As he left, we embraced and he quietly croaked in my ear “I love you.”

I told him “I love you too, brother” because I meant it with every fiber of my being. Katie tearfully started the car and Tiger Bernhardt disappeared from my life forever. He was gone a month later.

So you know what? Who gives a fuck whether Macdonald planned to put the clubhouse behind the 9th green or atop the bluffs? Whether the Wilson brothers consulted with Charles Macdonald or Charlie Chaplan before they built Merion is of no more importance beyond an amusing intellectual exercise in speculation.

When they wheeled Uncle George’s coffin out of that church, my first thought was how he taught me a whole lot more about life than golf history - and that all of us are going to say goodbye to each other one at a time, until nobody and nothing is left but that windmill above Sebonac inlet and bunch of data in a Treehouse that only exists in our hearts and minds.

I hope this is the last post on this horrible, destructive thread - and that everybody take off your hats and apologize to each other for acting like you’re immortal.      

[DMoriarty]

Gib, I know you mean well and I miss John and George, too. And Tom MacWood.
___________________________________________________________________

One of the interesting aspects of the blueprint is how well the golf holes line up with what exists today. The most notable exception to this happens to be the current 9th hole, which was originally supposed to be the 18th. The green as marked on the blueprint looks like it is around 70-90 yards short of the current green. This gibes with something I recall George having said or written. If I recall correctly he said that the original 18th green was moved back at some point, but I don't know if he was interpreting the same thing I am interpreting, or if there is some evidence that the green was originally built at the shorter location and then moved back very early in the history of the course.  

The stick routing from 1907 lists the hole at 440 yards which is about what it would have measured if built according to the blueprint. The 1911 scorecard lists the hole at 525.  So the hole was either built to the longer specifications during construction, or it was built to the shorter specs and changed at some point between 1907 and 1911.    I don't know which.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gib,

GCA.COM IS a hobby, a diversion from the more pressing issues in life.

An interest that's a source of information and entertainment.

When I leave the keyboard I leave what I've read and what I've typed behind me.

Compartmentalization has always served me well.

Tiger and I often discussed GCA, our battles with cancer and college football.
We agreed on two out of three.

I think you have to view the GCA.com discussions/debates from the perspective that they're just that, discussions/debates on shared interest topics.

Some are passionate about GCA and sometimes those passions rise to the level where they become contentious.

If we all agreed on every topic it would be a boring site absent much in the way of participation.

I wouldn't fret about the discussions/debates/arguments as in the general scheme of things they don't count for much

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Now, could you answer my question ?

Gib,

I agree on # 2

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gib,

I understand your dismay regarding the "tone" of the discussion, but that doesn't render the topic/s being discussed, irrelevant,

We're all interested, some to the point of passion, in golf course architecture.

Hence, in the context of golf course architecture, it does matter if Flynn sailed to the U.K. In 1910 or if C.B. Macdonald was instrumental in the design of Merion or where he intended his clubhouse to be at NGLA.

We're architectural geeks/junkies.

We're interested in all aspects of GCA.

We appreciate it when architects and superintendents and Pros participate and contribute.

And............ We have differences of opinion.

And, when you combine passion with differences of opinion the tone often intensifies.

It comes with the turf.

I like Mike Cirba, even though he's a lefty, but we disagree on some topics and agree on others.
While he does have a propensity to avoid answering challenging questions, he has an open invitation to play with me, as do you.

I like Bryan Izatt too.
I even anointed him, in person, with colossal moron status, and to this day haven't regretted that decision.😆😜

I disagreed, vehemently, with Tom MacWood and David on a number of issues, but came to agree with them when they presented information that would cause a prudent man to reconsider.  So, you're going to get strident if not contentious debate

I suspect that you're more upset by the classless/tasteless chain email from Mike's lurker friend and are venting because of it.
I understand that.

But let's not stifle debate because of the classless/tasteless actions of someone who's not even on GCA.com.

P.S.  I could have used the low Armenian draw today

[MCirba]

Patrick,

I'll answer your question and then I think it best to let this thread move to the back pages, unless someone comes up with some new information.

Certainly finding the original Sales Agreement(s) signed in December 1906 and June 1907 would go a long way to answering most of what's being argued about here but otherwise we're all just becoming redundant, and probably embarrassingly so.

You asked if that model was built/finalized before April 1908 wouldn't it be proof that Macdonald always planned to use the present site for his clubhouse.

Without being wishy-washy, I'd say no, it's not proof, but it would certainly go a long way towards evidencing Macdonald's intentions.

The caveat is simply because CBM optioned the land in December 1906 and finalized the routing sometime in the spring of 1907, commencing construction in May of that year.   It's possible he got the idea sometime during 1907 as the land was being cleared, which is still early, but not "always intended" per your original post, however you worded it.

I don't avoid difficult questions, I just avoid leading ones. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

If you think that asking you if "2 plus 2 equals 4" is a leading question, I certainly understand why you would find that a difficult question to answer.

If that model was crafted prior to April of 1908 it's proof positive that CBM intended the current site to be the site for his clubhouse before the Shinnecock Inn burned down.

And, if the date of that model is subsequent to April, 1908, it doesn't disprove that CBM intended the current site to be his intended site, prior to April, 1908.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()