Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Melvyn Morrow on June 17, 2008, 11:55:48 AM
-
Wayne, I hope you change your mind and stay.
I, for one will miss your input, your kindness and warm heart on GCA.com. You never failed to add to a debate, to expand the subject giving all of us encouragement and enjoyment. You will indeed be missed, leaving this site the poorer.
It is with great sadness that I have not been able to persuade you to stay.
No one should take pleasure in this news as all of us have failed and it does not reflect well on the members of GCA.com
-
What happened?
I never directly spoke to him, but Wayne was/is a great source of Info.
-
I, for one will miss your input, your kindness and warm heart on GCA.com. You never failed to add to a debate, to expand the subject giving all of us encouragement and enjoyment. You will indeed be missed, leaving this site the poorer.
Mr. Morrow, I heartily agree with your sentiments.
-
Mr. Morrow, I heartily agree with your sentiments.
I don't. Does he mean that Wayne's departure reflects poorly on the group of which there are 1500 or so members? I agree with that.
I don't see where Wayne's departure reflects poorly on all 1500. In fact, I'm sure most have nothing to do with it.
-
Wayne, I hope you change your mind and stay.
I, for one will miss your input, your kindness and warm heart on GCA.com. You never failed to add to a debate, to expand the subject giving all of us encouragement and enjoyment. You will indeed be missed, leaving this site the poorer.
It is with great sadness that I have not been able to persuade you to stay.
No one should take pleasure in this news as all of us have failed and it does not reflect well on the members of GCA.com
Melvyn:
When did this happen? :( :'( ;) Wayne cannot leave without the permission of Ed Baker and myself. ;D ;)
I sincerely hope it wasn't over that Merion thread which had gotten so out of hand that I checked out of it after several days.
Wayne come back we need you.
Best
Dave
-
And while I respect Melvyn very much, and find Kirk Gill to be a sage for our times....
I respectfully disagree.
Long-timers here will concur in this: people come, people go. It's always been that way. Heck two of the principles in the Merion threads had left and came back.
Now I will agree that the contentiousness of those threads has been nothing but awful. And it would be a shame if we lose the contributions of Wayne over this.
But as a reflection on the site as a whole?
That's taking it too far. People come, people go. Nastiness happens. People decide to leave. Most come back, some never do. Always has been this way, always will be. It's the nature of internet discussion.
TH
-
And while I respect Melvyn very much, and find Kirk Gill to be a sage for our times....
I respectfully disagree.
Long-timers here will concur in this: people come, people go. It's always been that way. Heck two of the principles in the Merion threads had left and came back.
Now I will agree that the contentiousness of those threads has been nothing but awful. And it would be a shame if we lose the contributions of Wayne over this.
But as a reflection on the site as a whole?
That's taking it too far. People come, people go. Nastiness happens. People decide to leave. Most come back, some never do. Always has been this way, always will be. It's the nature of internet discussion.
TH
Ah!! Once again Professor Huckster provides sage wisdom. However let's bring Wayne back.
Best
Dave
-
And while I respect Melvyn very much, and find Kirk Gill to be a sage for our times....
I respectfully disagree.
Long-timers here will concur in this: people come, people go. It's always been that way. Heck two of the principles in the Merion threads had left and came back.
Now I will agree that the contentiousness of those threads has been nothing but awful. And it would be a shame if we lose the contributions of Wayne over this.
But as a reflection on the site as a whole?
That's taking it too far. People come, people go. Nastiness happens. People decide to leave. Most come back, some never do. Always has been this way, always will be. It's the nature of internet discussion.
TH
I agree 100% with Tom and will add this.
Many in here including myself urged on several occasions to let it go, take a break, and then come back. But many of the principles in those Merion threads wouldn't let it go and it has apparently come to this.
-
Pat
I refer you to the Topic Re: Revisionism
Reply #265 on: Today at 07:30:56 am
Kirk
IMHO it reflects badly on all of us - ALL - Sorry you don't agree
-
Melvyn:
Hang around awhile longer and you'll see this cycle repeat many times.
As I say, it's the nature of internet discussion.
But Dave Miller is right also - it of course would be far better if we do not lose Wayne.
But as heartless as this sounds, well...
No one person makes or breaks this discussion group.
TH
-
"No one should take pleasure in this news as all of us have failed and it does not reflect well on the members of GCA.com."
No, no one should take pleasure in this and I doubt anyone does although I would certainly not want to guarantee that.
There may not be another member of this website who is a member of one of the top courses in the world who was as generous with others with his time, his club (hosting guest play) and with his willingness to do footwork and disseminate information to others on his club and course and other courses (Flynn's) he may be more architecturally familar with than most anyone else.
Wayne put his concerns on a thread or two and it didn't look to him like many cared or wanted to deal with what was really on his mind and what concerned him.
Frankly, I don't know that this website is even capable of dealing with what concerned him but I'm an optimist and I think they should at least try to.
-
Wayne, stick around....hopefully you are still lurking around to see these post.
-
It's too bad, he was such a fan of Raynor and Banks' work. ;D
-
I don't agree with Melvyn's statement. What Wayne Morrison chooses (or chose) should reflect on him.
This is a golf club architecture discussion board. If you cannot stand it when people don't agree with you, you shouldn't participate. You also shouldn't participate if you cannot understand or accept that many of us aren't taking sides at all. The only reason that this Merion debate became so acrimonious is because a very few participants can't play nice with each other. How does that reflect poorly on me, the moderators, or anyone else? My god we're grown men (and women) and people just want to take their ball and go home??
I think Ran's policy going forward should be that anytime someone asks to have their membership removed that this happens immediately and irrevocably. That might eliminate some of the cries for attention that happen all too frequently. For what it's worth, I think the site is better off to have Wayne Morrison participating, but not if he requires some sort of special consideration or treatment.
For those who stay, it's easy to participate on a discussion board. When someone disagrees with you on the site, take comfort from the words of Hubert Humphrey:
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously."
-
Tom
But as heartless as this sounds, well...
No one person makes or breaks this discussion group.
You may be right Tom but there are times when certain
Guys will be missed and Wayne is one. A serious loss to
GCA.com.
-
"No one should take pleasure in this news as all of us have failed and it does not reflect well on the members of GCA.com."
No, no one should take pleasure in this and I doubt anyone does although I would certainly not want to guarantee that.
There may not be another member of this website who is a member of one of the top courses in the world who was as generous with others with his time, his club (hosting guest play) and with his willingness to do footwork and disseminate information to others on his club and course and other courses (Flynn's) he may be more architecturally familar with than most anyone else.
Wayne put his concerns on a thread or two and it didn't look to him like many cared or wanted to deal with what was really on his mind and what concerned him.
Frankly, I don't know that this website is even capable of dealing with what concerned him but I'm an optimist and I think they should at least try to.
Tom:
This is cryptic...what is it that we could or could not do?
I'm with the majority of people on this issue. I am sorry to see Wayne go...I am confident that I am not responsible for his leaving...and it casts no reflection on me.
Best of luck Wayne.
Bart
-
I'm not going to judge Mr. Morrison's departure (or not), but my feelings are that I have always enjoyed reading his posts and certainly will miss them if he decides to leave. He has always been a great contributor to the site, and his posts would be well missed.
-
Tom
But as heartless as this sounds, well...
No one person makes or breaks this discussion group.
You may be right Tom but there are times when certain
Guys will be missed and Wayne is one. A serious loss to
GCA.com.
Melvyn:
I do not disagree that Wayne will be missed.
My point remains that many have been missed before and many will be missed again. This is no watershed moment in the history of this forum, nor any reflection on the general merits or demerits of the place.
And I say this with great respect for Wayne personally. But you know, John Mayhugh makes some solid points also.
TH
-
On the one hand Tom H (the sanest man on television) puts it well; on the other, TE notes something very important.
I've said many times before how grateful I am for the generosity of posters like Wayne (and TE, amongst about a dozen others) in sharing with me their knowledge and experience.
And generosity is the only word I have for it; cut it any way you want, but when someone gives of what they have to someone who can't give them anything in return, that's generosity.
In the daily back and forths of this site and some of the arguments here, I just thought it was worth mentioning and remembering this.
Peter
-
Peter:
As I say, I have nothing but respect for Wayne.
If he does leave, that is a great loss.
It's just far too broad of a statement to say this reflects badly on all of us, that's all.
TH
-
Tom - a sage for our times?
Geezle Peezle.
That said, I edited my post to reflect more accurately my specific feelings in response to Mr. Morrow's thread.
-
Tom
You made your point you don’t agree with My Statement - that’s your right
Any further discussion on Merion or subject Wayne has knowledge of will not be fully balanced - so it reflects badly on all of us because it may not be a fully informative debate. Or let me put it this way if a Team has a player missing it reflects badly for the rest of the team and their supporters.
Sorry Wayne, I was trying to show you some respect, consideration and my own sincere wish for you to stay.
-
I honestly don't know how to handle situations like this.
I don't think anyone's departure reflects poorly on the group. That's not even remotely fair to all of us who don't even look in on the threads in question. Even for those who do, I don't think it's really up to any of us to attempt to police the site, drum out offenders, whatever. We are all adults here and should know how to resolve arguments amicably, or at least to the satisfaction of those involved.
It is a big loss when anyone leaves, especially so in the case of someone like Wayne, a deep thinker about golf, gca and, as Tom P says, one of the most generous members of the site. I really only know Wayne through the site, yet I'm proud to call him a friend, and I hope he feels the same.
I can only hope that when someone chooses to leave, he takes some time to reflect and realize there are still a lot of good, solid people out there who are the ones losing out when someone else leaves.
-
Sorry Wayne, I was trying to show you some respect, consideration and my own sincere wish for you to stay.
Melvyn, I don't think you'll find many of 'us' want Wayne to leave. I haven't read any of the Merion thread so I'm not sure who said what about whom. His departure doesn't reflect well on the group, but you hopefully see that several take exception that it reflects on us as individuals.
-
I'm shocked and disappointed.
I recently had the pleasure of playing with Wayne and we had a most enjoyable round. His passion and knowledge shone through, and for someone like me who is young and still reading and learning about golf course architecture it was an invaluable experience.
-
Everyone makes choices and if Wayne choose to spend his time on other endeavours, more power to him.
I hope he plays a little more golf, spends some time w/ his familly & enjoys life. Maybe even finish writing a book? He was a valuable contributors whose inputs I will miss.
There are alot of people who used to be here and / or post much more ofter (Tommy, Gib, Neal Reagan, Ken Cotner, Todd Eckenroad, Dave Wigler, Noel Freeman, Geoff Shackleford heck Ran for that matter- glad to see Tom MacWood back) and for all of their own reason's choose to spend their time elsewhere.
In the end GCA is what it is. A place to hang out and hopefully learn.
It's not 2000 anymore and it'll be different 5 years from know.
-
Quote from: Wayne Morrison on Yesterday at 06:11:28 am
"I would add 1950 and 1939 to any list of all-time great US Opens. Unless of course playoffs turn you off."
What happened since yesterday? and Melvyn, how did you find out?
-
"Many in here including myself urged on several occasions to let it go, take a break, and then come back. But many of the principles in those Merion threads wouldn't let it go and it has apparently come to this."
Kalen:
That is certainly true. It was the prinicples in the Merion threads who wouldn't let it go that has lead to this.
But to Wayne and to me there are some other issues involved in that, issues which we happen to think are really HUGE and very fundamental that he tried to express his concerns about to this entire site. Apparently they weren't listening, didn't want to listen or didn't care enough to help those concerns to get resolved or to even consider them. And it may even be that many think the opposite of Wayne re: those concerns.
I guess some, maybe most, will just write this all off to something like "Life in the Big City" or something like that. If this site really doesn't care to address some of these things then that'll probably just reconfirm to Wayne Morrison why his reasons for leaving are good reasons and the right ones.
I think this site should consider what his concerns were and maybe many even want to do to that. But it just may be for many of us, something along the lines of what Lanny said: "We ain't got the guts."
I'll sure be the first to take responsibility for my part in those Merion threads like my rudeness and my insults and my incapacity to let it go. I welcome anybody asking me why I do that, and I won't even need to defend myself and pretend like I was right. I'll tell you it is wrong to do that but it's just so hard to stop it for me with what I saw happening.
This site should seriously consider what Wayne's concerns were that made him unregister.
I'll even go one better----I'm going to recommend a member of this website I really do believe can both mediate and resolve some of these issues, and I think he can do it right here on the discussion section, particularly the whole Merion/Macdonald, MacWood/Moriarty vs Tom Paul/Wayne Morrison issue, that is if he's willing to try it. I think he's got to be the most reasonable and objective person on here and he's also extremely interested in the history of Merion and those threads.
It's Colorado's Kirk Gill.
-
I'm with Sir Huckaby on this one. Wayne is a grown man and when he's ready he'll come back.
Wayne, enjoy your time away.
-
People, Wayne is not gone...you can still IM him for future access before it is too late.
Now poor Walt Cutshall is gone...long gone. note: When a guy is gone his name turns black and is registered as a guest.
I hope Wayne stays because he told me I could play Merion with him and I would hate to lose that opportunity.
-
I'll miss reading his posts. I hope he chooses to return sooner rather than later.
-
And while I respect Melvyn very much, and find Kirk Gill to be a sage for our times....
I respectfully disagree.
Long-timers here will concur in this: people come, people go. It's always been that way. Heck two of the principles in the Merion threads had left and came back.
Now I will agree that the contentiousness of those threads has been nothing but awful. And it would be a shame if we lose the contributions of Wayne over this.
But as a reflection on the site as a whole?
That's taking it too far. People come, people go. Nastiness happens. People decide to leave. Most come back, some never do. Always has been this way, always will be. It's the nature of internet discussion.
TH
While I agree in general with this sentiment, the loss of Wayne is a different matter. A while back I responded to a Flynn post and asked for information regarding Normandy Isle. Wayne just happened to have the plans for the redesign and and posted them here. Who else is going to that?
-
I'll even go one better----I'm going to recommend a member of this website I really do believe can both mediate and resolve some of these issues, and I think he can do it right here on the discussion section, particularly the whole Merion/Macdonald, MacWood/Moriarty vs Tom Paul/Wayne Morrison issue, that is if he's willing to try it. I think he's got to be the most reasonable and objective person on here and he's also extremely interested in the history of Merion and those threads.
It's Colorado's Kirk Gill.
I think this is a tremendous idea. I'd love to see a peaceful resolution.
If I might offer a suggestion, as a non-involved participant: each side should establish some sort of criteria for what it would take to convince themselves of the other side's side. One of the founding principles of the scientific method is that you come up with both a hypothesis, and a way of testing that hypothesis. Try to establish in advance the guidelines, and then let the evidence fall where it may.
-
Everyone makes choices and if Wayne choose to spend his time on other endeavours, more power to him.
I hope he plays a little more golf, spends some time w/ his familly & enjoys life. Maybe even finish writing a book? He was a valuable contributors whose inputs I will miss.
There are alot of people who used to be here and / or post much more ofter (Tommy, Gib, Neal Reagan, Ken Cotner, Todd Eckenroad, Dave Wigler, Noel Freeman, Geoff Shackleford heck Ran for that matter- glad to see Tom MacWood back) and for all of their own reason's choose to spend their time elsewhere.
In the end GCA is what it is. A place to hang out and hopefully learn.
It's not 2000 anymore and it'll be different 5 years from know.
John,
I am certain that I do not belong in the company of the others mentioned but thank you.
Melvyn,
I used to post several posts a day and be very involved in GCA. I ended up in a very heated argument that went on over a lengthy period of time and spread to multiple threads (Ironically with one of the same people Wayne is now) and decided that it simply was not worth it. In the past several years, I became an occasional lurker and very infrequent poster. To no surprise of mine, GCA has done just fine without my banter and frequent input.
Wayne is a great loss to me in that he was one of the most knowledgeable people on the site and someone who I went out of my way to read but the site survived the loss of Gib and I felt the same about him. GCA will be around in 2013 because it is a passion of so many people. Maybe Wayne will come back or maybe not but there are so many people here with such great knowledge and passion that you can always find threads worth reading and learning from and ultimately that is why so many of us who leave, end up as lurkers and just not as active contributors. I would hope Wayne stays around for the selfish reason that I like to read his insights but I would be an incredible hypocrite to do any more than hope, given that I completely understand why he is leaving. Between us, check back in 2010 and I'll bet he is throwing in some very insightful knowledge on a Philly Architecture thread for a new GCA'er.
-
I'll even go one better----I'm going to recommend a member of this website I really do believe can both mediate and resolve some of these issues, and I think he can do it right here on the discussion section, particularly the whole Merion/Macdonald, MacWood/Moriarty vs Tom Paul/Wayne Morrison issue, that is if he's willing to try it. I think he's got to be the most reasonable and objective person on here and he's also extremely interested in the history of Merion and those threads.
It's Colorado's Kirk Gill.
I think this is a tremendous idea. I'd love to see a peaceful resolution.
If I might offer a suggestion, as a non-involved participant: each side should establish some sort of criteria for what it would take to convince themselves of the other side's side. One of the founding principles of the scientific method is that you come up with both a hypothesis, and a way of testing that hypothesis. Try to establish in advance the guidelines, and then let the evidence fall where it may.
This is assuming Kirk even wants to wade into the mire. I would hope that being from Colorado Kirk has a really good pair of hip-waders ;D
-
If the Flynn book comes out sooner than it might have, then Wayne leaving is a good thing, or at least a net wash in most of our understanding of golf architecture history.
-
"I think this is a tremendous idea. I'd love to see a peaceful resolution.
If I might offer a suggestion, as a non-involved participant: each side should establish some sort of criteria for what it would take to convince themselves of the other side's side. One of the founding principles of the scientific method is that you come up with both a hypothesis, and a way of testing that hypothesis. Try to establish in advance the guidelines, and then let the evidence fall where it may."
George:
Good suggestion, even though I don't know much about "the principles of the scientific method." In honor of Wayne and his preferences in architecture do you think we could use "the prinicples of the natural method?" ;)
Seriously, I have a lot of faith in Colorado's Kirk Gill. It may even be appropriate for him to come up with his own suggestions.
One of his added attributes here is he may be the most interested on here in this entire Merion architectural history story. He actually wants to see it go on to some kind of resolution. To me that's very different from most of the rest on here who complain about those threads because they are so tired of Merion being discussed. Frankly, I can't exactly understand why they just don't totally avoid them, and ditch the complaints, if they aren't interested.
-
This was in answer to a question posed by Mr. W. Whitehead.
"WWhitehead,
With respect, some of the most stimulating discussions on this board of been off the O/T variety.
I do believe we have some very bright people here, that have played golf at the highest level and have the scalps of hundreds of the good and great courses. Their thoughts on the architectural merit of such venues are well considered and informative. However, their thoughts on other subjects are as equally informative and sometimes much more enjoyable than the dry history of who did what to whom and where.
When it comes to pure architecture and the genesis thereof, I think the Merion thread turned into a contentious bore."
Bob
I thought it only a matter of time before the Merion thread caused a schism in the ranks. The ultimate sentence above was written before I heard of Wayne's misgivings and subsequent purdah.
I am sure that sometime in the future we shall hear from Wayne, I certainly hope so.
Bob
-
I don't know what's been going on with all of this Merion bitterness I keep hearing about, second-hand, because I haven't read any of the Merion threads that have caused such unhappiness.
My dealings with Wayne Morrison have all been civilized and satisfying. As Peter said: He's been generous to me with his time and his words, beyond what was necessary.
GCA.com without Wayne is as much diminished as the Phillies were without Richie.
Say it ain't so, Mr. Morrison.
But if it is so: Best wishes. And thanks.
Dan
-
I miss Wayne's baseball stories. Isn't he related to a Hall of Famer? I'm always looking for his twin brother in St. Louis but I don't know what he looks like.
-
John, I heard somewhere he's related to the author of Beloved. You know, the woman who named Bill Clinton our first black president.
Wayne, I also hope you reconsider and stick around. For one thing, I never could get very far into Beloved, and didn't understand it. Maybe you can ask Toni to give me some insights?
-
Wayne might be smarter than I think he is :o
-
Isn't he related to a Hall of Famer?
He is. Richie Ashburn? I'm trying to recall who. He described him to me once in a PM as a solid hitter in an era where the marquee outfielders of the day had more power or something like that.
-
His wife is related to Ashburn--his daughter.
-
"His wife is related to Ashburn--his daughter."
That's true Mayday, and she can run around the bases about four times faster than you ever could. As for Wayne, I think he's quite closely related to Mel Brooks somehow.
-
If Wayne hadn't decided to leave already, my stating that Richie Ashburn entered because of hitting .306 for the New York Mets in 1962, would surely have driven him away! ;D
-
Melvin Morrow.
This has nothing to do with over 1480 participants on the site. You've indicated before that you think that my essay is totally responsible for the ugliness of the Merion threads on the theory that I should have known, from past experiences, that Wayne, TEPaul, and Mike Cirba would react badly to my opinions, and so I therefore you think I should not have expressed them.
I'd prefer you to address this openly and direct your criticism to me rather than disparage others.
____________________________________
If I might offer a suggestion, as a non-involved participant: each side should establish some sort of criteria for what it would take to convince themselves of the other side's side. One of the founding principles of the scientific method is that you come up with both a hypothesis, and a way of testing that hypothesis. Try to establish in advance the guidelines, and then let the evidence fall where it may.
George, I would be glad to let the evidence fall where it may. That was my intention from the beginning.
I think the ground rules would be simple.
1. Try to treat each other as we would if we were face to face.
2. Stick to specific, substantive, and supported critiques rather than empty platitudes and vague and general insults.
3. If you cannot or will not back up your factual claims with the facts, then do not make the claims.
4. Play by the same rules as everyone else.
-
I miss Wayne's baseball stories. Isn't he related to a Hall of Famer? I'm always looking for his twin brother in St. Louis but I don't know what he looks like.
John:
Wayne is the Son-In-Law of the great Richie Ashburn - Member of the baseball hall of fame and great player and announcer in his later years.
Best
Dave
-
David Moriarty
I notice that you don’t read the post correctly. The first and most obvious mistake so far on this one, is that you have not bothered to check how to spell my name. The second is that I have not singled anyone out to blame but said that in MHO it is a reflection on all of us (some do not agree).
My intentions regards this post was to try and keep Wayne as a member, not all about you.
If I have something to say to you, I will address it to you, as per my previous comment.
-
I think that sometimes we lose perspective and fail to remember, if not recognize, that this is the internet and not a face to face conversation. We type out our comments and have the opportunity to review them and consider them before they are posted. I only wish we could do the same when we are at home with our spouses and children. It is an opportunity to express our views and then reflect on whether we want to relate them to others; we can consider how someone will react or feel when they read what we have to say and then, and only then, decide on whether to post it or not. We are not talking about uninformed, opinionated fools who always seem to be the ones giving their opinion on some political issue; we are talking about guys who know what they are talking about when it comes to golf course architecture. At least that's the way it appears to me, a guy who knows relatively little about the subject. I hope that there is a GCA get together sometime in the near future when guys can have a drink together and realize that when it's all over, we should it enjoy while we can.
-
David Moriarty
I notice that you don’t read the post correctly. The first and most obvious mistake so far on this one, is that you have not bothered to check how to spell my name. The second is that I have not singled anyone out to blame but said that in MHO it is a reflection on all of us (some do not agree).
My intentions regards this post was to try and keep Wayne as a member, not all about you.
If I have something to say to you, I will address it to you, as per my previous comment.
Thanks for clarifying Melvyn. Spelling was never my strong suit. I am one of those who disagrees that we are all to blame. If you want to address the reasons he left, as your post claims to, then you should take a look at Wayne's last couple of posts where he told us why he left.
-
"I'll even go one better----I'm going to recommend a member of this website I really do believe can both mediate and resolve some of these issues, and I think he can do it right here on the discussion section, particularly the whole Merion/Macdonald, MacWood/Moriarty vs Tom Paul/Wayne Morrison issue, that is if he's willing to try it. I think he's got to be the most reasonable and objective person on here and he's also extremely interested in the history of Merion and those threads.
I got the idea a few weeks ago to act as judge in a trial of the issues joined between Morrison/Paul v. Moriarty/MacWood. I am eminently qualified as I am a former Recorder's Court Judge for the town of Rincon, Georgia, and also former Associate Judge for the Town of Thunderbolt, Georgia.
Most importantly, unlike Kirk Gill, I am not that interested in the history of Merion. Well, a little, but not so much that I am willing to read all of the stuff just for fun.
Therefor, I volunteer my services to preside over the trial as a fair and impartial judge, and I will publlish a written finding of fact and conclusions of law. I will require that my expenses be paid however. I'll do my best to hold them down.
-
David Moriarty
I notice that you don’t read the post correctly. The first and most obvious mistake so far on this one, is that you have not bothered to check how to spell my name. The second is that I have not singled anyone out to blame but said that in MHO it is a reflection on all of us (some do not agree).
My intentions regards this post was to try and keep Wayne as a member, not all about you.
If I have something to say to you, I will address it to you, as per my previous comment.
Thanks for clarifying Melvyn. Spelling was never my strong suit. I am one of those who disagrees that we are all to blame. If you want to address the reasons he left, as your post claims to, then you should take a look at Wayne's last couple of posts where he told us why he left.
To the Treehouse:
To me it is very unsettling that a persons I know very well such as Wayne and Tommy Paul along with others that I don't know as well but respect can get into the type of rancor that happens at times. I consider Wayne a very good friend. We have had many great times together and to me it is a sad day when someone of this calber feels a need to say they are leaving the site.
While I agree with Bob Huntley that the Merion thread ultimately reached the point of being a total bore that is just my opinion. I checked out of it and therefore avoided any rancor or otherwise. However we are supposed to be reasonable individuals (have not met a single GCA'er I haven't liked even if our opinions differed) and we should be able to disagree with each other respectfully.
Come back Wayne. Ed Baker refuses to grant a release ;)
Fairways and Greens,
Dave
-
I'm sorry to see Wayne leave. He was always nice to me, and we share a common interest in older baseball history.
Like most here, I stopped reading the Merion threads months ago, and never delved deeply into them. I don't care who designed Merion. It is a great golf course, and Wayne has the privilege of playing in that beautiful park. He's a lucky guy.
Come back when you're ready; in the meantime I'm sure you'll enjoy what you do.
-
Now that Wayne Morrison seems to have decided to unregister and leave I think this website should consider, once again, what he said on a thread he started about a month ago. I suggest this website and its administrators read and very carefully consider what he was trying to say, particularly in paragraphs #3, #4 #5. If we don't all do that we just MAY have a very fundamental problem on here with clubs and others and it may seriously hurt this website and many of the things a number of us are trying to do with architecture, not just here but elsewhere. It seems that the administrators and a number of others have always had some real concerns about access seeking by some to PLAY a course. The access problem or perhaps the ACCESS PHILOSOPHY or SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT some or even many on here may have to any club's information is more of a problem by perhaps a factor of one thousand. I think we just have to consider this or we're all going to lose out in the end. Morrison was one of the best and most generous providers of some very serious and important architectural information on one of the most famous course's in the world. We cannot be losing people like this for the reasons he left. He was badgered and insulted and basically potentially compromised within his own club on here by a few who made and still make some really ridiculous demands and more ridiculous insinuations about him and even the intentions of his own club and its history. This should not be allowed to happen---not for ANY reason. Not just should it not happen, no one on this website should ALLOW it to happen, but it did. Some on here may not care about Merion or the details of its history but certainly some do and this is why this happened. Do I understand what I may've done here with my insults and rudeness and inablility to "let it go"? Yes, I most certainly do and I'm so sorry it lead to this by Wayne Morrison. All I can say is I did it because I care so much as a few others around here do. One of the important things Wayne said in his post below is that it's just basically common decency and commonsense to come to a club first or at least those near or at it that know most about it and run things by the club or them first when anyone tries to do serious research and writing about it. That did not happen here on these Merion threads going back five years and culminating in this recent IMO essay. What is that all about? What does that mean and what should that tell all of us? No serious analyzer and writer of a golf club's history has ever done that. Not a single time that I'm aware of. If that doesn't tell all of us something pretty important, then it's remarkable and pretty sad. We all need to consider what it means and what happened here. If we don't it will just really hurt this website, and more of us, like Wayne Morrison, who is just the most recent in a number of departers, will be gone and that important information access that he provided for this website will be gone too. Please, read Wayne's concerns again and consider them and discuss them.
Here they are from that previous thread "A little Perspective...":
I was kindly given access to a very important set of club documents by the Merion Cricket Club. As of 1942, the Merion Cricket Club and Merion Golf Club officially split from one another. While there is a large cross-membership, the two entities are completely separate. Any considerations by the Cricket Club towards me are greatly appreciated and must be respected in return. They have just taken the first step in organizing their archives. They don't have policies and procedures in place to manage access and use of their club documents. So any expectation of access and dissemination of primary source material is unfounded and this is what I tried to address in an earlier post. That was misinterpreted; I think more by distrust and disharmony than anything else. Maybe the culture of private clubs is not well understood by some on this site.
The Merion Golf Club Archives is perhaps the leading club archives in the country. We have had a few years to organize and establish principles and practices. Access to this Archive may be granted if one follows certain procedures and fills out the proper forms.
It seems to me that some members of this site believe that private documents from private clubs should be freely accessible. I cannot understand why that is, but they are surely mistaken. I'm sure members of private clubs have a better understanding of this and accept the fact that privacy is very important and supersedes the public's right to know in most cases. The instant demand for sharing information to which I have just become familiar with is unsettling. Original source material is the property of the Merion Cricket Club. I will not share transcripts I made at this time nor without permission at any time.
The first step is to study the transcripts, put together a presentation and make that presentation to the Merion Cricket Club and the Merion Golf Club. Then the clubs can consider the presentation and decide for themselves what can and cannot be disseminated and in which forums. Taking their views into account is vital. I am a member of Merion Golf Club and not a member of Merion Cricket Club. However, I would follow this line of behavior if I didn't have anything at all to do with them. I respect their right to privacy and am obligated to follow their rules when allowed access. By their rules, not the unwritten rules of this website.
When Tom MacWood and David Moriarty conduct their exhaustive efforts and come up with their conclusions, right or wrong, they should be obligated to share that information with the clubs involved as a first step, as a matter of courtesy. They should allow peer review during their processes. It is vital to do so. To present original work on this website without regard to the clubs involved is in bad form. For the founder and administers of this site to allow this information on the site without some established procedures is reckless and has caused many of these problems. Is this a blog or a platform striving to achieve a higher potential? Endorsing such findings without being informed enough to do so is harmful. Presenting interesting ideas as fact is also causing us problems within the site and beyond.
Allow me the time to do a proper job with my research. I was just introduced to this material. I will work with others as I proceed to make sure there are checks and balances. Lastly, let me address the clubs first. In due time, I feel certain that the information will be made available, IF the clubs decide to allow it. Questioning my motivations is more revealing of the questioners than the object of those questions. It is not for the site to determine what should be done. It is not proper for members of this site to question what is being withheld and what truths may be hidden or what myths are being protected. Stop browbeating, stop fighting and stop speculating.
This site could be acclaimed for its fair and objective research and its dissemination of results, yet it has failed miserably. We have lost opportunities time and time again to engage clubs and share information with each other in a cooperative effort. Some passionate researchers seem more interested in making a name for themselves and revising history than conducting proper research with peer review. We all have a part in this, including Ran and Ben.
We’ve already seen that a few very important clubs state that they will not make their archives available to researchers for fear that their club histories will be questioned and their club character and ethos questioned as has been done on this site to Merion. To its credit, Merion has stayed above the fray. Yet it is certain that such uniformed opinions of information and motivations presented as fact harm the regard for the website and limit the potential good that can result from this platform. Not only is this site damaged, but I fear that clubs will think twice before they wish to provide original source material to the USGA golf architecture archive and research center considering the behavior of some on this site, some of the poor quality of the analysis and a lack of common sense and courtesy.
So what shall we make of our opportunities? We are not very good at self-regulating ourselves. Our founder and administrators are rarely engaged. Shall we continue to self-destruct or work together in a cooperative and respectful manner going forward?
-
Disappointed to see Wayne leave. I worked with him on a tiny portion of his overall his research about Flynn. Based on that experience alone, I knew he always brought an extremely well thought out position or idea through either his personal experiences or research.
He was one of a few people on this site that when I saw his name as making a recent post I tried to take the time to read.
-
Why should some clubs and their members be treated with kid gloves? I guess it all comes down to access in the end.
-
Speaking of guys that don't post here any more, what is Darryl Boe up to? He frequently played in Florida while down selling steel.
Gals? Sally Livingston was posting. I met her at a walking tour of Sugarloaf Mountain before it grew in. What is she doing now...beside not posting here.
-
TE - I think your post #54 was an important one, and a very good one. I've never walked a mile in Wayne's shoes, or yours, but I think I get where you're coming from. For all the good the internet (and this website) has done, I think it (and this website) has also done some harm, i.e. it has devalued "knowledge" and given us "facts" instead; it has given people a "voice" but with little that holds us or our opinions "accountable"; and it has blurred the lines between the public and the private, and thus left those asking for privacy looking like they're hiding something.
I've said it before: Wayne does not OWE me (or this website) anything at all. Who he is and the club he belongs to and his years of hard work put him in an unique position to write an essay on Merion's history, as that is as it SHOULD be. The last thing Wayne is obliged to do is apologize for what he brings to the table, or defend it.
Peter
-
Speaking of guys that don't post here any more, what is Darryl Boe up to? He frequently played in Florida while down selling steel.
Gals? Sally Livingston was posting. I met her at a walking tour of Sugarloaf Mountain before it grew in. What is she doing now...beside not posting here.
Wow, what a concidence, I have not been on here in probably a month or two. A combination of life changes, being very busy with my business, and some of the well documented changes around here. Low and behold I dont know why (it might have been that I really didnt want to pay any more attention to that aweful NBA Finals game) but I decided to see what was happening on here. Then I see the sad news that someone I really respected, and enjoyed his participation, and enjoyed the breif direct contact that I have had with him has called it quits on here. And in the course of reading this thread I see your questions John. Quite the coincidence! Thanks for remembering, and asking about me.
As I said I have been very busy with family obligations, and business being very busy.
Unfortunately I have not gotten down to FL quite as much as I used to. You are in Orlando right? I have been down to FL a couple times this year but I dont have much business in Orlando anymore. I am normally in Jacksonville or Tampa now if I am down on business. My only trip to Orlando lately is my yearly (hopefully) trip for the PGA Merchandise Show.
I hope to get on here more often and see how things are going these days. Let me know what you have been up to.
And again Wayne if you are reading this, I am sorry to hear that you are leaving and the events that led to that.
-
Great Darryl, now I'm wondering where Jeff Fortson is!
Yes, still in Orlando. Moved to Oviedo 17 months ago. My time away from golf was 2007.
Maybe someday we'll connect for a round.
-
Great Darryl, now I'm wondering where Jeff Fortson is!
Jeff's back. He started posting again a litle while ago.
-
To all those who disagreed with my comment ‘Reflects badly on all of us’ I am minded of the following quote
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
Make of it what you will, but this was a post to try and show what we are loosing with the departure of Wayne Morrison. His leaving is our loss. We have been unable to persuade him to stay, a reflection of our collective failure of persuasion and of our unity as a (internet) discussion group.
This post was never intended to do anything more than to generate support in the hope of persuading Wayne to stay.
As I previously mentioned this site will be the poorer for his departure.
-
When Tom MacWood and David Moriarty conduct their exhaustive efforts and come up with their conclusions, right or wrong, they should be obligated to share that information with the clubs involved as a first step, as a matter of courtesy. They should allow peer review during their processes. It is vital to do so.
Why?
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of clubs written about on this site, from the US, the UK, and all over the world. This idea makes no sense. Does this go for Brad Klein, Geoff Shackelford, Ron Whitten, Daniel Wexler and Bob Labbance too?
Whatever the organization, be it a private club, a private company, public company, goverment entity, sports body, family, whatever, it is their obligation to figure out their own history, not mine. If they can find someone at the club to do it for free, thats great, if they can't, they can pay a professional (and its not my fault if their porfessional gets it wrong). Its not my obligation to do the work for free and turn it over. Last I checked we live in a free society.
I've never in my life demanded anything from these clubs, why am I obligated to them. The idea that writers are demanding information is goofy. The sad reality is often the information these old clubs have is not very useful, that is why they occasionally get their own history wrong. And how many clubs even care about their architectural history. The Merion thread(s) got out of hand because personalities clashed, not because individuals were demanding anything from the Merion GC or the Merion Cricket C.
Sometimes you get the impression this is some kind of bartering system. You are obligated to share the information with club as a courtesy, if....fill in the blank. People have come to me over the years asking for info and I freely share what I have, I don't ask for anything in return. And too many to mention have kindly shared information with me. Thats how its worked in the past, but evidently thats not good enough - now we should be proactively contacting golf clubs throughout the world, its our obligation.
You would think by the tone of this long statement that we are dealing with state secrets. This is the history of golf architecture; we're not talking about sensative information. Again, the history of golf architecture; we're not identifying double agents or dealing with corporate espianage. And the events we are looking at took place ninety or more years ago. All the princilpes are dead, most children of the principles are dead.
I love the history of golf architecture, but we have blown everything out of proportion on this website...to be accurate a few have. Talk about needing some perspective.
-
Yes it's complete nonsense that a researcher should have to share what he or she has found with the club prior to going public with it.
-
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
I agree that we are all to blame. I recently offered a simple solution and was immediately cast as a boor and a bully because it would inconvenience the power structure of the most vocal faction on the site. They could pull together like the brothers they are in access and end this but prefer not to rock the golden canoe. It just might take a member of a great course like Merion to shut off the tap to wake these people up. Thank you Wayne...Give it three days, I heard that has worked in the past.
-
It's a loss to this site, that's for sure. Years ago, I posted on the AOL golf message boards occasionally, and if you think there's adolescent behavior here at times, it was strictly toddler behavior over there most of the time.
One thing I think people forget or lose sight of is that when someone is a member of a club -- and they join that club to recreate as most people do -- it must positively become a burden at times to go to the club and not have to discuss the "message board" issues at hand. F'in A ... were I Wayne, I probably would have left this board months ago.
-
One thing I think people forget or lose sight of is that when someone is a member of a club -- and they join that club to recreate as most people do -- it must positively become a burden at times to go to the club and not have to discuss the "message board" issues at hand.
How do you think I feel?
-
Through research, if one believes that new information has been uncovered, would it not be prudent to contact the clubs or organisations concerned to question if they were already aware of the information and seek their comments – if any.
I would have thought that it was part of the practice of good research. Leave no stone unturned. With my little experience in research I have contacted clubs. More than a few did not respond, which as we have seen has raised questions on some of my findings – the fault is mine for not doubling my efforts. I cannot blame others. However, thankfully many did respond.
If a club or organisation decides not to respond that is their choice, but I have shown them the courtesy of my information, relating directly to them.
I have contacted the R&A, Brora, Cluny Estates and many, many more in my
search and have uncovered many new items including the former sites of lost courses.
Perhaps it just reflects more about the researcher’s approach than anything else. Each to his own, but I have found it not only valuable but helpful to contact clubs.
-
To all those who disagreed with my comment ‘Reflects badly on all of us’ I am minded of the following quote
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
Melvyn:
With all due respect, I think this is a bit over the top. To compare a quote relating to the genocide of 6 million people with a controversy on a discussion board related to, of all things, golf architecture, diminishes the words of Simon Weisenthal in ways that are barely describable.
I, too, am sorry that Wayne has left. He contributed much to my understanding of my favorite golf course in America, Merion East. I had a few off-board emails with him, and he seemed like a true gentleman and keen historian of the game, and particularly Flynn and Merion.
But like many here, I tired of the Merion threads, and stopped reading them, largely because their emerging tone and the seeming unwillingness of the participants to argue their points (many of them worthy) in ways that didn't resort to name-calling and broadsides. We have too much of that type of debate here in America (and probably in the UK as well); I spend time on GCA to get away from that sort of thing and wallow in reasoned, thoughtful, fun, and free-flowing debates about a subject that 99.99998 percent of the world could care less about.
-
Tom,
Generally I agree with you. As Kelly said about the Kennedy's, they don't always get asked to cooperate. However, sometimes they protest, or perhaps even sue, if what is written is slander. And then it becomes an issue. We have discussed so many clubs and courses where it isn't an issue, so what makes Merion different? Wayne and TePaul act as if DM's questioning of its architectural heritage is slanderous.
The court of public opinion will decide, I think, even if Merion thinks its their right to decide. While it should be, in practical reality, its not. If they keep their documents in house, there will always be a small faction that will accuse them of hiding the truth. I get the feeling that they would be best served to eventually put out Wayne and TePaul's research - perhaps also noting DM's - out in the public eye. Won't these threads be mentioned in the 2013 US Open program and other coverage anyway?
As has been said before, no matter how history eventually re-judges Merions architectural lineage, it can't possibly diminish a great club and course. In truth, the biggest thing they have to worry about diminishing their course's reputation is if the 2013 Open turns out to be a snoozer. Sadly, the next five Opens will be judged by the one just completed.
-
To all those who disagreed with my comment ‘Reflects badly on all of us’ I am minded of the following quote
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
Melvyn:
With all due respect, I think this is a bit over the top. To compare a quote relating to the genocide of 6 million people with a controversy on a discussion board related to, of all things, golf architecture, diminishes the words of Simon Weisenthal in ways that are barely describable.
If Simon Wiesenthal said that (and I don't doubt it), he was certainly paraphrasing Edmund Burke -- who, for all I know, was paraphrasing some earlier sage.
-
Phil
Nothing is diminished.
The quote reflects on human nature and it is still applicable today.
-
Technically, Tom MacWood is correct here and on some level, academic freedom is important. I would never argue otherwise, and perhaps in some idealized world there is some value to the "ivory tower" detached, purportedly objective approach that claims to only want to know "facts" and people be damned.
Yet, we do not exist as islands of information, and we are all collective members of this website, for better or worse, so what any one person does reflects on all of us here, like it or not. If you think that's not true, you are naive, because this site is read by an unbelievable amount of industry people, and the general tenor, tone, and content here ARE important.
In an age of instant "misinformation", where an Internet rumor can be started that Barack Obama is a muslim or John McCain is gay, and left unchallenged, can and will be seen as "Fact" in some uninformed circles, I think all of us here has a greater responsibility.
Given that shared destiny and as important as academic freedom admittedly is, I think if we ask ourselves some common-sense, fundamental questions, I think they crystallize most of the salient issues here very well.
If any of us were to write something for publication about the history of Garden City, would you contact Patrick Mucci to discuss first? Especially if Patrick had been acting as an archivist for that club?
What about Olympic Club? Would it be important or just common cooperative good sense and decency to try and work with Joel Stewart, Gib Papazian, Kevin Reilly, and others??
Personally, I can't imagine writing something for publication about Ohio State GC without trying to work cooperatively with Tom MacWood. Especially if the contention was something like "Mackenzie had absolutely nothing to do with the design of the course"....
Even if one answers "Yes" to all of the above, and I can't imagine too many of us here who honestly believe that, can you imagine afterwards sitting here week after week whining and demanding that the member you just slighted and tried to make look uninformed is somehow now obligated to provide you with source materials of items you didn't have access to originally....just so you can argumentatively have all the ammo for a fair fight as "facts" and premises in your original piece start crumbling into dust based on closer scrutiny?
Would anyone do that to Patrick Mucci?? DEMAND that he give them records and private minutes of Garden City GC because they weren't able to get them originally and now their knowingly controversial and even inflammatory paper is suffering based on additional findings?
How about Bob Huntley at his club?? Would anyone here have the unmitigated gall to make demands of him??
And if they did, wouldn't many here jump to their defense, stating rightly that NO ONE had the right to trample on a GCA friend or even aquaintance that way, and essentially misuse this site for that purpose.
I apologize for naming names, above, but I have to wonder what Wayne Morrison ever did wrong here that he didn't deserve the same courtesy, righteous indignation in his defense, and simple common decency and respect for the fact that he has a life and relations beyond this website.
I find myself asking many of the same questions Wayne has asked himself recently.
Bullies like John Kavanaugh above walk with inpunity around here. Once again he comes forward pretending that he's interested in this website by ending this discussion with his "suggestion".
His suggestion was for Brad Klein to remove me from the Golfweek panel, even though to my knowledge, I'm the only member of that panel in the Merion discussions.
John has always hated Golfweek, has a clear animosity and issue with Brad Klein, and has used this site over and over to insinuate all sorts of BS about the panel and it's members, yet most here seem to think he's just a misguided, nice guy. "OH...that's just John".
However, unlike Wayne, I'm not quitting this website. I frankly wouldn't give some people here that satisfaction, and to the rest of you, I value your friendship and camaraderie.
Melvyn is also correct.
When personal attacks happen here, if we don't self-govern and rise to the defense of the attacked, this place is going to be exactly what it is fast becoming. I'm sure that sounds hypocritical coming from me, as some here believe I unfairly attacked David Moriarty. While that's true, I had heard from what I believe to be impeccable sources that his reasons for coming back here and writing his piece (which was also in conjunction with Tom MacWood) was based on personal vendettas for past wounds against Tom Paul and Wayne Morrison. So, in trying to defend against this site being used for that type of thing, I did go too far and later apologized to David, both publicy and privately. Neither was accepted, but since that time I've tried to keep personal stuff out of the debates, and have tried to lighten the mood with humor, despite the fact that it's been a one-way effort.
This site is important to some of us, which is why my defense has been so unreasonably strident at times.
Some of us had hoped this place could be a forum for actually accomplishing something REAL and USEFUL, besides the expenditure of hot air and keystrokes...likeworking in close conjunction with new initiatives like the USGA architectural museum, or the Cobb's Creek restoration effort, or just hoping to be a resource for clubs looking to go back to their classic architectural roots. Perhaps, THAT was naive on our part.
Instead, it seems as if its been shanghai'd and is simply destined to continue as some sort of fringe, self-appointed, "gadfly" of architectural wackos way outside the mainstream, having little or no actual impact to what gets done "on the ground", and largely irrelevant....
-
"Why?
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of clubs written about on this site, from the US, the UK, and all over the world. This idea makes no sense. Does this go for Brad Klein, Geoff Shackelford, Ron Whitten, Daniel Wexler and Bob Labbance too?"
Why Tom MacWood?
Did Brad Klein, Shackelford, Whitten, Wexler or Labbance write about clubs without going to them first, without making them aware of what they were doing, without every trying to cooperate with them? I doubt that. The way you and Moriarty went about this is all wrong in my opinion, and in Wayne Morrison's and in Merion's. Both of you did it to challenge a club's history---you termed it their "legend", their "status quo" and likely just to challenge us and them. We think you do this simply to make a name for yourself by doing it that way. But the worst of it is it has led to an essay that is completely speciously reasoned apparently due to lack of complete historical information. I doubt it could have been that way if there was cooperation. The point is it is just wrong---really wrong. The facts are wrong and the approach is wrong.
But that's fine, it's a free world and people write garbage about clubs and all kinds of things all the time. We thought GOLFCLUBATLAS.com could do better than that but in our opinions with people like you two on here and seemingly others who agree with you there won't be anymore cooperation from us and I doubt Merion either and any other clubs we have anything to do with. We're going to us other entities. I could even go for an essay like that on here if the critiquing of it in these threads was carried on reasonably but it wasn't even close---it was nothing more than a bunch of deflective crap then insults thrown at us and even the club that there must be something to hide. That was followed by demands by the author for material he never had when he wrote his essay. He should've had it before he wrote his essay and he should have known it was necessary to the integrity of his piece. He would have had that too if he'd begun this whole thing in a manner that was not intended as a challenge which is just what it always was.
This is your style, your modus operandi and now his. We will no longer be part of any of that because we just don't agree with it and if that's the way this site wants it to be it will lead to continued rancor on here with other subjects, and other clubs and other people.
We believe we have a better way to go about research and architectural history writing that simply makes more sense, uses commonsense and decency towards clubs by using cooperation and goodwill. Yours is a classic example of a real "outside looking in" mentality and it has some very real and very serious drawbacks, in our opinion, essentially leading to just poor scholarship via lack of complete information or and a lack of willingness to treat it accurately.
Congratulations, you've introduced a novel and new approach. I hope this website appreciates it but we don't and we don't think this website and its participants will ever find golf clubs that do either.
-
Mike Cirba,
I believe MacWood is also an excellent and worthy Golfweek rater. I don't want either of you two to be removed from the panel, I just want you guys to get along like the brothers you are. I too am sorry I ever got mixed up in this mess and believe have paid a price for my intervention.
-
To all those who disagreed with my comment ‘Reflects badly on all of us’ I am minded of the following quote
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
Melvyn:
With all due respect, I think this is a bit over the top. To compare a quote relating to the genocide of 6 million people with a controversy on a discussion board related to, of all things, golf architecture, diminishes the words of Simon Weisenthal in ways that are barely describable.
If Simon Wiesenthal said that (and I don't doubt it), he was certainly paraphrasing Edmund Burke -- who, for all I know, was paraphrasing some earlier sage.
A bit of post facto Googling casts some doubt on the provenance of that quotation.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" (in exactly those words, or words very close to them) has been *widely* attributed to Burke for a long, long time.
At least some Google-able sources say it has not been found in his writings.
Even so, I'm with Melvyn. Simon Wiesenthal's use of that observation about life on Earth does not mean that, henceforth, no one may make the same observation without thereby diminishing the horrors of the Holocaust.
P.S. Proper attribution can be a dicey matter -- can't it.
-
I do not believe it was the obligation of Tony Pioppi or Brad Klein to send their articles to Yale for peer review. I don't believe it was the obligation of Daniel Wexler to send his material on the architectural evolution of Augusta National, Quaker Ridge, Merion, Lakeside and Colonial to those clubs before publishing it. I don't think Geoff Shackelford or Ron Whitten are obligated to send their articles critical of Riviera or Baltusrol to those clubs for their approval. I don't believe it is the resposibility of George Bahto and Gib P to send their manuscript to every club profiled or mentioned in their book for peer review. I don't believe it is the reponsibility of Paul Turner, Noel Freeman, Russell Tally, Sean Arble, Neil Crafter, Bernard Darwin, Walter Travis or HW Wind to send their articles on golf courses throughout the world to the clubs for peer review.
The idea that these writers are obligated to share their research on a subject with their subject prior to publishing is goofy. Again these are not state secrets; this is golf architecture history - pretty light-hearted stuff
I've always been under the impression history was not the property of any one person, group or entity.
-
The most germaine question is whether Whitten cooperated with Bethpage when he asserted Burbeck was co-designer of the Black course, isn't it?
That article, in which I suspect Whitten did NOT feel necessary to get the blessing of Bethpage to print it, stirred a lot of heated discussion here, including some name calling, but it never got as personal as this.
The next germaine question is Mike Cirba's hope that this site could be useful rather than just a discussion group. I hate to say it but it IS naive on his part. I don't think the net in general is thought of that way. Case in point, the USGA and ASGCA are working on documenting architectural history and as noted, TePaul, among others is actually working on that. I would love to hear an update from him on how that is going, personally, but that is a subject for another day. However, while it makes sense that someone interested in gca history would participate here, I doubt the USGA ever seriously considered this site as a resource in and of itself.
-
Bullies like John Kavanaugh above walk with inpunity around here. Once again he comes forward pretending that he's interested in this website by ending this discussion with his "suggestion".
His suggestion was for Brad Klein to remove me from the Golfweek panel, even though to my knowledge, I'm the only member of that panel in the Merion discussions.
John has always hated Golfweek, has a clear animosity and issue with Brad Klein, and has used this site over and over to insinuate all sorts of BS about the panel and it's members, yet most here seem to think he's just a misguided, nice guy. "OH...that's just John".
Mike Cirba,
Please understand that I am capable of disagreeing with an individual or question how he controls his employees and still like, admire and respect that person. How many times do I have to say that I like Brad Klein...I really, really do. I think rating and publishing those ratings is very serious business and not just some tea party where you invite your friends even if they can't tell the difference between Oolong and Puerh.
-
The most germaine question is whether Whitten cooperated with Bethpage when he asserted Burbeck was co-designer of the Black course, isn't it?
That article, in which I suspect Whitten did NOT feel necessary to get the blessing of Bethpage to print it, stirred a lot of heated discussion here, including some name calling, but it never got as personal as this.
Jeff,
That would certainly be the pertinent question if Bethpage Black were a private club.
However, even there, if I were to have researched the Whitten essay and was going to publish it on GCA, I would contact Phil Young, Geoff Childs, Mike Sweeney, Mike Golden and others here I know have a vested interest in Bethpage beforehand, especially if one of them like Phil had been the archivist for that course.
It's much easier to write controversial and inflammatory things about a public course, simply because access can't be denied. ANGC suffers from the same thing, only because access is virtually impossible.
-
The most germaine question is whether Whitten cooperated with Bethpage when he asserted Burbeck was co-designer of the Black course, isn't it?
That article, in which I suspect Whitten did NOT feel necessary to get the blessing of Bethpage to print it, stirred a lot of heated discussion here, including some name calling, but it never got as personal as this.
On Tillinghast, Burbeck, Whitten and Bethpage Black:
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,3845.0.html (http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,3845.0.html)
and
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,3782.0.html (http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,3782.0.html)
-
A good example would be the Cobb's Creek stuff.
After the work our group has done on uncovering and documenting the history of Cobb's Creek, can you imagine someone coming on here and publishing a paper that essentially tries to directly or indirectly imply that what we wrote about the course was wrong, unfounded, or otherwise sloppy and lazy?
If they really wanted to get at all the facts, or their search was simply about to find the "facts" and truth about Cobb's Creek, can you imagine them not contacting me, Joe Bausch, Geoff Walsh, or others first?
If they didn't, might you reasonably wonder why and question what their agenda might be?
Wait...I probably just gave someone an idea. ::)
Dan,
Interesting that Patrick Mucci seemed to require a much higher standard of proof in his defense of Tillinghast over the revisionist account. ;)
Interestingly, "Fifty Years of American Golf" provides contemporaneous documentation that TIllinghast was indeed the architect of Bethpage.
-
Mike
What difference does it make if Bethpage is private or public...a religious organization or state goverment? Does one entity have a stronger right to history than the other?
If any of those gentleman did not agree with Whitten, they were free to write a counter essay. Thats what Phil and I chose to do. I never felt it was Whitten's obligation to share any of his research with the State of NY or me.
We live in a free society.
-
Mike
What difference does it make if Bethpage is private or public...a religious organization or state goverment? Does one entity have stronger right to history than the other?
If any of those gentleman did not agree with Whitten, they were free to write a counter essay. Thats what Phil and I chose to do. I never felt it was his obligation to share any of his research with the State of NY or me.
We live in a free society.
Absolutely Tom...you unquestionably have a right to publish whatever you want, wherever you want, about whomever you want.
Just don't cry foul when other's here sense your lone wolf style as antagonistic or personally motivated and become defensive and/or uncoorperative, espcecially on topics near and dear.
-
Fifty years of American Golf didn't get all their facts straight on Merion either.
-
Tom MacWood,
People certainly aren't "obligated" to send their articles to a club for peer review.
But isn't it common courtesy to contact a private club when you are about to make "research" public that totally questions its history?
Wouldn't it have been more professional if the club was contacted prior to releasing this "opinion paper" so if Merion chose they could have shared private documents that may or may not have supported Mr. Morarty's hypothesis?
I'm not sure common sense played any part in this.
-
It's much easier to write controversial and inflammatory things about a public course, simply because access can't be denied. ANGC suffers from the same thing, only because access is virtually impossible.
Mike, If I understand your point about ANGC, I either don't agree or don't see your point. Small gripe but the analogy doesn't translate to me.
Controversy and inflammatory comments about ANGC seems like a relatively recent reality. Granted, it does not live in vacuum and our world's IT advances have brought almost everything right into out living rooms. If ANGC had not changed a blade of grass under Hooties reign, would there have been inflammatory commentary?
Back to topic, I'll throw on saying it's everyones loss, not a reflection, when someone decides to no longer participate. It's just a much bigger loss when it's someone with Wayne's passion, knowledge and enthusiasm.
-
Tom
The idea that these writers are obligated to share their research on a subject with their subject prior to publishing is goofy. Again these are not state secrets; this is golf architecture history - pretty light-hearted stuff
I've always been under the impression history was not the property of any one person, group or entity.
I may accept the first part of your statement if the author was being paid for his work, but I though we all contributed on this site for free and with the intention of promoting Golf & Golf Architecture in all its forms. Or have I misunderstood things.
I would hate to think that some are receiving financial benefit for their essays, whilst others are not – this is the quickest way of stopping free and honest debate and the flow of interesting information.
-
"You would think by the tone of this long statement that we are dealing with state secrets. This is the history of golf architecture; we're not talking about sensative information. Again, the history of golf architecture; we're not identifying double agents or dealing with corporate espianage. And the events we are looking at took place ninety or more years ago. All the princilpes are dead, most children of the principles are dead.
I love the history of golf architecture, but we have blown everything out of proportion on this website...to be accurate a few have. Talk about needing some perspective."
Tom MacWood:
I completely disagree with what you said there. It's probably the basic difference between us. The actual history of the architecture of some of these great old courses is about people long gone, and even their sons and daughters are gone, and it's about events contained in documents and drawings and such long past.
But that is not all there is to it, or researching it or writing about it because that material does not belong to us, it belongs to those clubs and the people who administer those clubs and they are by no means long gone. And it most certainly is not that they don't care about it or their histories.
You two have attempted to couch all this into some assumption that these clubs and the people who administer them and have access to this kind of historical raw material inherently have something to hide---eg your constant presentation that those histories are somehow intentionally wrong, unfactual, inaccurate in some attempt to create and maintain legends and some status quo.
To me, and to others this is just a false premise, a smokescreen, basically bullshit on your part. It's just a guise you seem to want to use to make some subject your interested in look like something that NEEDS historical treatment----eg NEEDS a reinterpretation etc.
You just don't understand these people who are here now and are responsible for this old material. You don't know them and you don't seem to want to and this leads to your modus operandi replete with some very serious and dangerous rationalizing of their intentions.
You continue to maintain that we here in Philadelphia, particularly me and Wayne and Mike Cirba are just rude and defensive and insulting because we're trying to hide something.
The truth is we are no different than anyone else in and around any other golf club in America. It will always be this way with the approach and the methods you're using. This is not just about some old and cold raw research material from a century ago----this is very much about human nature both here and now.
Your approach is all wrong----it's basically as simple as that!
-
Wow, am I glad I skipped the Merion threads. It is a great course and I love it, but for people to get worked into such a frenzy is beyond me. Have at it I guess. Wayne, playing Merion is much more enjoyable than talking about it. Have fun.
-
The idea that these writers are obligated to share their research on a subject with their subject prior to publishing is goofy. Again these are not state secrets; this is golf architecture history - pretty light-hearted stuff
Tom MacWood - I can't disagree with this assertion. My only caveat would be that each club's membership and archives might prove to be a valuable resource, and shouldn't be ignored. A first attempt at access to information might be rebuffed, but if your work is subsequently presented to that club, then who knows? Another answer might be forthcoming. We ARE talking light-hearted stuff, I think, but stuff that still stirs strong emotions. If there's any obligation on a writer's part, Tom, it would be an obligation to do the best job possible, yes? And if a particular club doesn't grant access, the way that the writer deals with that response could prove to be a testing ground for how other clubs might deal with similar requests from that writer, or others.
I also agree, Tom, with this statement you made: "The Merion thread(s) got out of hand because personalities clashed, not because individuals were demanding anything from the Merion GC or the Merion Cricket C." Still, the totality of that situation ended up putting Wayne Morrison in a difficult position, and ultimately made him feel that he could no longer participate here, and that's too bad.
-
Tom,
When you wrote, "Mike What difference does it make if Bethpage is private or public...a religious organization or state goverment? Does one entity have a stronger right to history than the other? If any of those gentleman did not agree with Whitten, they were free to write a counter essay. Thats what Phil and I chose to do. I never felt it was Whitten's obligation to share any of his research with the State of NY or me. We live in a free society." you make very good points.
The problem though is that in the singular and specific case of Bethpage, it doesn't hold.
The first notice or contact with Bethpage by Ron Whitten or anyone else at GD was when he showed up at Bethpage with Burbeck's son unannounced to take photographs for the article. Even a public facility such as Bethpage has rules as to the use of photographic equipment and the way the images are used. They require permission whena photograph will be used for a profitable venture such as a magazine article.
Dave Catalano was simply told that GD was doing an article on the first superintendant of Bethpage and they wanted to photograph his son there for possible use. They chose to hide the nature and content of the article until they were leaving.
All those associated with park management were angry because they felt used and lied to. They also were upset that they hadn't been given a chance to speak to the "facts" of the article before publication, especially when they found out that it was being worked on for many months before this.
The problem as they, the USGA, Rees Jones, and others (I was contacted by all of these at this time just weeks before the Open), was that the purpose of the article was not for historical truth but was clearly and singularly for the express purpose of selling magazines.
Now GD is in business to sell magazines and make money, that is understood, but the way they went about publishing what they did was insulting to all involved... and that is before any articles could be written disproving any and all of their claims.
In addition, and I mention this in hopes that no one from GD will read this because they will quickly make the change, if Tilly didn't design the Black he didn't design the Red. Why then, if one looks up the Red course on GD.com, is the architect of Bethpage Red listed as A.W. Tillinghast with no mention of Mr. Burbeck? At least in my opinion, that speaks volumes as to GD's motivation and integrity.
In the case of a Bethpage Black, and as we can see the possibilities in the Merion threads for 2013, if you are going to knowingly publish something as outstandingly controversial as challenging the creator of the course that is about to host the U.S. Open and do so in a manner that deliberately doesn't allow either the club or the USGA to be given a FAIR ability to addrss the issues beforehand, you have done something highly unethical and wrong.
They should have contacted Bethpage during the research process regardless of their (GD's) conclusions.
Again, I feel this because it is singular to the Bethpage situation and not as a general rule. It is the exception that establishes it.
-
The idea that these writers are obligated to share their research on a subject with their subject prior to publishing is goofy. Again these are not state secrets; this is golf architecture history - pretty light-hearted stuff
Tom MacWood - I can't disagree with this assertion. My only caveat would be that each club's membership and archives might prove to be a valuable resource, and shouldn't be ignored. A first attempt at access to information might be rebuffed, but if your work is subsequently presented to that club, then who knows? Another answer might be forthcoming. We ARE talking light-hearted stuff, I think, but stuff that still stirs strong emotions. If there's any obligation on a writer's part, Tom, it would be an obligation to do the best job possible, yes? And if a particular club doesn't grant access, the way that the writer deals with that response could prove to be a testing ground for how other clubs might deal with similar requests from that writer, or others.
I also agree, Tom, with this statement you made: "The Merion thread(s) got out of hand because personalities clashed, not because individuals were demanding anything from the Merion GC or the Merion Cricket C." Still, the totality of that situation ended up putting Wayne Morrison in a difficult position, and ultimately made him feel that he could no longer participate here, and that's too bad.
Kirk
My experience with these clubs has been very good, both from a research point of view and their reaction to what I have written. But I appreciate why you (and others) might not get another impression if you were to read the never ending criticisms of TE Paul. A good example is Crump & PVGC. If you listened to TE you would have thought a class action suit was eminent, I was wondering myself. But much to my surprise a respected member of the club thanked me for writing the essay and how I approached the subject, and invited me to be his guest.
It was not my intention to have Wayne depart from GCA. In fact, if you look back at his last comment, or one his last comments, he was thanking me for apologizing to him. I'm no angel but I try to keep things in perspective.
-
"Case in point, the USGA and ASGCA are working on documenting architectural history and as noted, TePaul, among others is actually working on that. I would love to hear an update from him on how that is going, personally, but that is a subject for another day. However, while it makes sense that someone interested in gca history would participate here, I doubt the USGA ever seriously considered this site as a resource in and of itself."
JeffB:
It's coming along nicely, I think, but it is not a simple process, all things considered. We hope it will open in the fall (The Internet component of the USGA's Architecture Archive). At first it will likely concentrate on four clubs and courses, as a first step and as an example for what will follow on a national or perhaps global basis someday.
Does the USGA look at GOLFCLUBATLAS.com as a resource? Sure it does in some ways. There are way more people out there who read GOLFCLUBATLAS than probably most on here realize---way, way more and that certainly includes the USGA. They even once talked to some of us on here about a discussion group component to the USGA Architecture Archive and basically two of us on here said: "Are you nuts, if you want to do that you sure will need some very tight and serious daily "monitoring" unless you want the kind of constant train-wrecking that happens on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com."
So I'm not sure what will happen in that way. What we're pushing for is maximum interactivity some day to simply make ease of information access as good as it can be with the tech tools available today. Maybe that will just include a link to GOLFCLUBATLAS.com
But I'll tell you one thing and that is we always will get back to good old human nature with any of this. If I see a guy like David Moriarty puts a statement on this website like he did the other day….
“"Not only that but the USGA is relying on you to put together a meaningful archive? Yikes."
…..This website will get less cooperation from what I’m involved in and not more cooperation. This man and a few others will just have to start using his head better for things to work out well.
-
"But I appreciate why you (and others) might not get another impression if you were to read the never ending criticisms of TE Paul. A good example is Crump & PVGC. If you listened to TE you would have thought a class action suit was eminent, I was wondering myself. But much to my surprise a respected member of the club thanked me for writing the essay and how I approached the subject, and invited me to be his guest."
Tom MacWood:
If you're going to say things like that on here constantly you better get your story both right and complete.
I really don't give a damn if you use me constantly, as Moriarty does, as some excuse for everything that's gone wrong here, but the fact is you bear plenty of responsibility too even if you seem competely incapable of ever admitting or even acknowledging it.
My own problem with you is not really your arguing or challenges on these threads, it's your style and technique of not dealing with with clubs in any way before you produce some essay on them as your subject. And I believe the way Moriarty went about his essay is much worse than even what you've done with your Crump suicide essay. I don't think I could ever change my position on that or would ever care to, even if I am realizing more people on here than I suspected don't seem to see it that way. On the latter point all I can say is it both surprises me and disappoints me.
With what happened with you re Pine Valley, I've told that on here too and you just choose to ignore it. Yes, John Ott did invite you to Pine Valley but he did not do that before calling me and asking me both if I felt he should do that and also that he wouldn't do it unless I came down to be there and play with you. You sort of need to include that part to be balanced about it all, don't you think Tom MacWood? Or maybe you don't think that which is pretty indicative of a whole lot of the problem I've always had with you. John Ott was one of my closest friends for about thirty years---certainly in the world of golf. Furthermore, I'm the one who made it possible for you to email him your essay to him that he took to the club. You seem to constantly choose to ignore that too which is also indicative.
-
TE
I think you are missing the point. The point is this Merion fiasco is an exception, and I'm not so sure the constant criticisms coming from some on GCA are even an accurate reflection of what the powers that be at Merion think - exemplified by Mr. Ott's positive repsonse to the Crump essay, with your help of course.
By the way I did contact PV's historian in preperation for my Crump essay. Club historians are wonderful resource and have been very helpful to me over the years.
As I've said we are discussing golf architecture history - not some heavy world altering subject.
-
"Case in point, the USGA and ASGCA are working on documenting architectural history and as noted, TePaul, among others is actually working on that. I would love to hear an update from him on how that is going, personally, but that is a subject for another day. However, while it makes sense that someone interested in gca history would participate here, I doubt the USGA ever seriously considered this site as a resource in and of itself."
JeffB:
It's coming along nicely, I think, but it is not a simple process, all things considered. We hope it will open in the fall (The Internet component of the USGA's Architecture Archive). At first it will likely concentrate on four clubs and courses, as a first step and as an example for what will follow on a national or perhaps global basis someday.
Does the USGA look at GOLFCLUBATLAS.com as a resource? Sure it does in some ways. There are way more people out there who read GOLFCLUBATLAS than probably most on here realize---way, way more and that certainly includes the USGA. They even once talked to some of us on here about a discussion group component to the USGA Architecture Archive and basically two of us on here said: "Are you nuts, if you want to do that you sure will need some very tight and serious daily "monitoring" unless you want the kind of constant train-wrecking that happens on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com."
So I'm not sure what will happen in that way. What we're pushing for is maximum interactivity some day to simply make ease of information access as good as it can be with the tech tools available today. Maybe that will just include a link to GOLFCLUBATLAS.com
But I'll tell you one thing and that is we always will get back to good old human nature with any of this. If I see a guy like David Moriarty puts a statement on this website like he did the other day….
“"Not only that but the USGA is relying on you to put together a meaningful archive? Yikes."
…..This website will get less cooperation from what I’m involved in and not more cooperation. This man and a few others will just have to start using his head better for things to work out well.
TePaul,
Thanks for the update. I am head of the ASGCA internet site committee.....We briefly discussed a discussion board and dropped it for the same reasons. We are looking instead to do Q and A with various architects but doubt we will allow public comment. Maybe, but doubtful because we can't provide full time monitoring, as you suggest.
There really are some big picture issues that Merion threads highlight. It may end up like the early days of the computer biz where a lot of indies sprang up, but eventually the big boys dominated the market. As USGA and ASGCA get sites devoted to gca history and theory, its possible that this site will go down in importance, esp. given the funding the USGA could put towards a site compared to Ran.
-
Tom MacWood:
Since I posted a reprint of Wayne's concerns on post #54 of this thread, I think the discussion on it has gone just fine. It's what I was hoping for.
You outlined your position and your philosophy on Wayne's concerns and I outlined mine. There is no reason at all to argue about them. They are what they are and I think we've both been clear. We very much disagree on this and I think we have both shown pretty clearly why we disagree.
I think that's all that can be asked for on here. It's good to do it this way. People can understand it so much better.
Thank you
-
"Thanks for the update. I am head of the ASGCA internet site committee....."
You are? Cool. I guess I should have known that but we pretty much keep Chad in the loop on everything as it progresses.
-
Tom
The idea that these writers are obligated to share their research on a subject with their subject prior to publishing is goofy. Again these are not state secrets; this is golf architecture history - pretty light-hearted stuff
I've always been under the impression history was not the property of any one person, group or entity.
I may accept the first part of your statement if the author was being paid for his work, but I though we all contributed on this site for free and with the intention of promoting Golf & Golf Architecture in all its forms. Or have I misunderstood things.
I would hate to think that some are receiving financial benefit for their essays, whilst others are not – this is the quickest way of stopping free and honest debate and the flow of interesting information.
Melvyn
I don't follow you. Please explain.
-
This thread shows everything that is wrong with this site.
All this fighting over golf courses and stories?
-
Melvyn.
I believe that is the first time on these boards that I have been compared to Hitler. Thanks for keeping all of this in proper perspective.
I am confused by your position.
Previously you have explicitly blamed the Merion mess on me. Your reasoning was that I should have known that TEPaul, Wayne, and Mike Cirba would be very upset about what I had to say, yet I nonetheless came back, posted my essay, stood up to them, and continue to stand up to them.
Now you suggest that Wayne is leaving because the site has not stood up to the evils he faced, those evils presumably being me and Tom MacWood.
I detect more than a bit of hypocrisy. Isn't our War Crime simply that we stand up to these guys, in the face of endless and unsupported barrages of personal attacks, criticism, even threats?
If we should all stand up for anything, shouldn't we stand up for anyone's right to come here and freely and openly discuss golf architecture without being endlessly attacked and ridiculed? Shouldn't we stand up for the notion that a person ought to be given the opportunity to address criticism leveled at him or his work?
-
Your Honor, I rest my case. ;)
-
I'd like to clarify a few things.
The Use of the Private Information of the Clubs
I used nothing but information in the public domain for my essay. I have not demanded access to material from MGC, MCC or any other club.
If Wayne's club wants him to keep the MCC information private, then that is what he should have done. I have no problem with that. But Wayne did not keep it private. He selectively posted part of the source material in an attempt to disprove my essay, he shared the information with non-Merion members, and he and TEPaul have claimed and continue to claim that the source material proves 90% of my essay invalid. Aside from one cherry-picked letter, they have not produced a single verifiable fact to back up their claims. As recently as Wayne’s last post, he and TEPaul continue to take shots at my essay solely based upon information that they refuse to allow me to verify.
In short, these guys have been using the MCC material as a sword to ridicule, yet they also use the club’s supposed privacy concerns as a shield to block any attempts to validate any of their claims. It can’t be both ways. Either put up or shut up, to put it bluntly.
I remain willing to respect any club's wish to keep their private documents private, but I will not silently abide by the direct or indirect use of supposedly secret documents to discredit me or my essay. I also remain willing to reconsider any and every portion of my essay, and conform it to the historical record where it does not. But not without the facts.
My Decision Not to Contact Merion
I considered providing Merion with an advanced copy, and even discussed it with Ran, but I ultimately decided against it.
Whenever I had previously tried to discuss Merion, my efforts met nothing but extreme hostility and resistance from those associated with or claiming to be speaking for the club. More than that, I had been told specifically, repeatedly, and in no uncertain terms that the powers at Merion, including the club historian and chairs and members of various key committees, had said that they were extremely upset that I was even researching Merion’s history, wanted me to stop, and wanted nothing to do with me. (While I did not know it until recently, these were apparently lies, told to get me to stop looking into Merion.)
So my concern was that presenting the work to Merion would have accomplished nothing positive but would have creates a number of problems. I feared they would have tried to stop me or delay me from releasing it, or that they would have given it to Wayne and TEPaul, who undoubtedly would have done everything they could to discredit me and my essay and to stop me from releasing it before anyone even got a chance to read it. Those who have been around for a while may recall the incessant bullying, nastiness, and ugliness directed toward Tom MacWood when these guys got word he was researching Pine Valley and Crump. I wanted no part of that.
As it turns out, some of my concerns were at least partially justified. What I thought were private communications with Merion somehow immediately found their way to TEPaul who promptly tried to use them rhetorically against me on the boards. I doubt that was Merion’s intent, but I also doubt that they fully understand that if they involve Wayne he will inevitably involve TEPaul, and that TEPaul knows no bounds when it comes to trying to protect what he feels is his to protect.
Now I have few questions for all of you:
When it first leaked out that I was working on something that significantly contradicted the accepted notion of Merion’s history, where was the outcry for me to go to Merion first before releasing it?
As I recall, there was none. To the contrary, there was a frenzy of attacks and criticisms because I wanted to finish the essay before posting it. Those criticizing me now for not having gone to Merion are some of the same ones who demanded then that I post everything I had immediately. They could not even wait for the essay to be finished!
Wayne Morrison and Tom Paul were certainly involved in those pre-essay “discussions.” In fact, before even coming back to the site I forewarned Wayne, Tom Paul, and a number of other posters that I was coming back to openly, honestly, and frankly discuss Merion, and that my ideas would very likely be cutting against much of the accepted notion of Merion’s history. I even gave them a sampling of the kinds of contentions I would raise. I asked them, specifically, if they had any problem with any of that.
If Wayne Morrison or Tom Paul or anyone else thought that I needed to go to Merion first, then why did they not tell me so before? Everyone had ample opportunity to do so.
The fact is, this whole notion is being used as yet another distraction to detract from the substance of my essay, and as an excuse for Wayne and TEPaul to continue to try and trash me and my essay without allowing me to verify any of their claims.
Why Did I Not Go to TEPaul and Wayne?
I am shocked whenever someone like Mike Cirba, Wayne, or TEPaul even suggests this, and more shocked when anyone who knows anything about what has happened in the past takes it seriously.
Again, I am put in a difficult position with how to respond. If I tell the reasons and provide examples, I will be accused of attacking them. (Imagine. This is so twisted that my exposing their egregious behavior toward me and others is considered me attacking them!) So, without getting into details let me just say that I did not contact them for the following reasons:
1. These guys have repeatedly shown they are incapable of having a honest, frank, and fact-driven conversation about anything having to do with Merion.
2. These guys have repeatedly shown an unwillingness or inability to deal with key source material without misrepresenting it, misunderstanding it, ignoring it, misinterpreting it, or overlooking it.
3. I cannot work with people I do not trust, and both Wayne and Tom have proven themselves to be untrustworthy when it comes to these issues.
Despite all of this, I did try and work with Wayne, once my essay was out there. I provided him all of the source material which I had and he said he did not, as well as a number of interpretations and explanations about issues which he and TEPaul had completely wrong for a number of years. I told him I would help him in any way I could (and the offer still stands.) He indicated his willingness to cooperate with me as well, but as soon as he finally went to MCC to look at their source material he abruptly cut off all cooperation and direct communication. He has not even had the decency to honor his word regarding documents he told me he would provide to me!
So again, in my opinion any suggestion that I should have tried to work with these guys is outrageous, and purely rhetoric used to justify their unjustifiable behavior. Shouldn't my opinion be the only one that counts with regard to who I choose to work with and who I choose not to work with?
_____________________________
My suggestions for how we get past all this are simple, and I cannot imagine why anyone would disagree with them. Following these suggestions would, however, require a significant change in behavior by TEPaul and Wayne.
1. Try to treat each other as we would if we were face to face.
2. Stick to specific, substantive, and supported critiques rather than empty platitudes and vague and general insults.
3. If you cannot or will not back up your factual claims with the actual facts, then do not make the claims.
4. Play by the same rules as everyone else, no matter your affiliations or sense of self-importance.
Thanks.
David.
_______________________________________
[Post moved from previous one to separate issues only tangentially related.]
-
David,
Would your essay have been published by Golf Digest without some attempt to contact Merion GC about your research? I doubt that it would have been published. Anyone can "publish" anything on the internet. That's why there are websites like snopes.com and http://urbanlegends.about.com.
-
Excuse me?
Oh, no sir, Your Honor, I already said I rest my case.
Are you asking me if I think we should have a continuance so opposing counsel can seek psychological treatment? If so, I'd prefer to leave that up to him or up to you, Your Honor. Or perhaps we should leave that up to the jury, after-all they're the ones who have to listen to him.
-
David,
Would your essay have been published by Golf Digest without some attempt to contact Merion GC about your research? I doubt that it would have been published. Anyone can "publish" anything on the internet. That's why there are websites like snopes.com and http://urbanlegends.about.com.
Steve, I don't know. I didn't try to publish it. So far as I am concerned there is a lot that should be done with the essay before it would be ready for broader publication. I MAKE THIS POINT IN THE ESSAY ITSELF. That is why I put it in an "In My Opinion" Section on a website catering to architecture geeks. It is as close as I could come to broad-based peer review.
You put the word "publish" in quotes like I think I have "published" my essay the way the traditional term is used. I don't think I have. If I used that term, it was a mistake and I'd be glad to change it. As I stated in the essay, it is a work in progress.
I explained why I did not contact MGC. If I knew then that I had been misled about their views on my work, and that those purporting to speak for Merion did not, then I would have gladly provided my essay to Merion. I have great respect for the place. As it is, I contacted them after my essay was posted, but consider my communications with them private, so I won't get into them here.
-
Steve,
You asked David, "Would your essay have been published by Golf Digest without some attempt to contact Merion GC about your research?"
Go back to the previous page and look at my comments about the Whiiten article on Burbeck and Bethpage Black. They not only didn't contact Bethpage, but when discovered on site taking photographs simply stated that they were for an article about Burbeck's work as the original superintendant... It was only later that the told them what it was really about. They purposefully misled.
I can't state whether they would have published David's piece or not or, if they did, whether they would have been in touch with merion first, but if the past portrays the future then I would find it hard to believe that they would have.
Again, I think David should have contacted Merion, but when challenged on this point (see above post) he gave a solid explanation (whether one agrees with it or not) as to why he chose not to.
-
David and Phil,
I think any responsible editor who have required a Merion contact first to see if their archives or even MCC had any information to the contrary.
I realize that David's essay is a work in progress and regret that it took the course that it did on this site. When will the revision take place now that "broad based peer review" has taken place? I would imagine there will be many asterisks given that MCC won't permit further access and/or publication beyond that which WM has provided.
I objected to Ran's use of the word "excellent" in the heading as well to no avail.
My basic reaction from the beginning was why didn't CBM himself write about his consultations with the Merion committee. I find it difficult to imagine that CBM did not publicize his Merion involvement if it was indeed more than just a consultation.
-
David and Phil,
I think any responsible editor who have required a Merion contact first to see if their archives or even MCC had any information to the contrary.
We have been hearing on this site for years from the self-acclaimed Merion experts that they had searched everywhere, including in Merion's archives, for records relating to the origins of the East, but that there were none, and that they had probably all been destroyed in a flood. Again it was probably my mistake for believing this, but it was only after my essay was posted that I began to realize just how much important material had been overlooked, ignored, concealed, misrepresented, and/or misunderstood by those who had been making the representations concerning the complete absence of source material.
As for MCC I did contact them over a year ago to try and arrange for access their documents for research purposes, but was denied access because I was not affiliated with MGC.
When will the revision take place now that "broad based peer review" has taken place? I would imagine there will be many asterisks given that MCC won't permit further access and/or publication beyond that which WM has provided.
Wayne has produced the text of one letter that negates one of my inferences and this will have an impact on other portions of the essay as well. Others have had some productive comments and inputs, and I have reconsidered a few things, and found a few errors or unsupported points as well. Tom MacWood found the article that proves some of my analysis was correct but in doing so renders some of it moot, and I have not decided whether or not to leave those portions.
The main thing is that there is obviously much more out there and it definitely will impact my essay and it seems absurd to make the changes now and then more changes when I get access to what these guys are working on. I just don't see that there could be much wrong with my essay, otherwise wouldn't Merion and even these guys want to get the information out there that would correct it?
I objected to Ran's use of the word "excellent" in the heading as well to no avail.
I am not sure why Ran should refrain from offering his opinion on this site. My understanding is that he started this site so he could offer his opinion on golf course architecture and those related to golf course architecture. The demands that he should censor himself are bizarre, I think. It is not as if he hasn't provided a forum for anyone else to set the record straight if they so choose. Unfortunately, that has not happened.
My basic reaction from the beginning was why didn't CBM himself write about his consultations with the Merion committee. I find it difficult to imagine that CBM did not publicize his Merion involvement if it was indeed more than just a consultation.
I think CBM's reputation for trying to take credit for everything has been largely misrepresented on this site. Even in Scotland's Gift he only mentions a very limited number of his courses. So why would you expect that he would have written about Merion? As far as I know, he was not even involved in building it.
_________________
Steve and Phil,
I understand why people think I should have gone to the club first. As I said, that was my instinct as well. But, ultimately, given the situation, is that a sound reason to discount or disparage the substance of my essay? I don t think so. Nor is it a reason to criticize my essay without allowing the source of the criticism to be verified.
Steve, what if anything would have changed about my essay had I gone to Merion first. I am unaware of anything.
-
David Moriarty wants facts. So now I’m going to give you just facts, nothing more. These are facts that have been on this DG for two months. Below from a post of his today he recounts that he was met by extreme hostility before his essay came out. There was none of that at all---nothing. Matter of fact, in a group email exchange from Pat Mucci on another subject entirely I asked David Moriarty if he would please consider coming back. I made the same request to Tom MacWood on that group email.
All we did is simply wait for his essay for about two weeks. He did provide a brief outline in that group email on what points he would cover, nothing more. I never asked him anything about his research material or where it may have come from. I still don’t know that and it’s never mattered to me. Perhaps two or three weeks into these threads following his essay I asked him if he'd ever been in contact with Merion because I'd never known. He certainly never volunteered to tell me anything about any of it. Below he seems to try to make it look like we warned him that Merion would be resistant to his research and essay. That never happened all, not an iota. We had no idea what his essay was going to be about and either did anyone else at Merion but he certainly makes it look that way. Basically none of us knew a thing. All any of us did was wait.
He makes it sound like all we did is threaten and bully him both before his essay and as soon as it came out. So I’d like you all to judge that for yourselves. Just below is what he said today happened back then before his essay came out and as soon as it came out. Following that is the first post from me followed by the first post from Wayne Morrison. You Judge for yourselves if it looks like anything remotely like hostility. I’d say it looks to be just about the opposite! ;)
My Decision Not to Contact Merion
I considered providing Merion with an advanced copy, and even discussed it with Ran, but I ultimately decided against it.
Whenever I had previously tried to discuss Merion, my efforts met nothing but extreme hostility and resistance from those associated with or claiming to be speaking for the club. More than that, I had been told specifically, repeatedly, and in no uncertain terms that the powers at Merion, including the club historian and chairs and members of various key committees, had said that they were extremely upset that I was even researching Merion’s history, wanted me to stop, and wanted nothing to do with me. (While I did not know it until recently, these were apparently lies, told to get me to stop looking into Merion.)
So my concern was that presenting the work to Merion would have accomplished nothing positive but would have creates a number of problems. I feared they would have tried to stop me or delay me from releasing it, or that they would have given it to Wayne and TEPaul, who undoubtedly would have done everything they could to discredit me and my essay and to stop me from releasing it before anyone even got a chance to read it. Those who have been around for a while may recall the incessant bullying, nastiness, and ugliness directed toward Tom MacWood when these guys got word he was researching Pine Valley and Crump. I wanted no part of that.
As it turns out, some of my concerns were at least partially justified. What I thought were private communications with Merion somehow immediately found their way to TEPaul who promptly tried to use them rhetorically against me on the boards. I doubt that was Merion’s intent, but I also doubt that they fully understand that if they involve Wayne he will inevitably involve TEPaul, and that TEPaul knows no bounds when it comes to trying to protect what he feels is his to protect.
Now I have few questions for all of you:
When it first leaked out that I was working on something that significantly contradicted the accepted notion of Merion’s history, where was the outcry for me to go to Merion first before releasing it?
As I recall, there was none. To the contrary, there was a frenzy of attacks and criticisms because I wanted to finish the essay before posting it. Those criticizing me now for not having gone to Merion are some of the same ones who demanded then that I post everything I had immediately. They could not even wait for the essay to be finished!
Wayne Morrison and Tom Paul were certainly involved in those pre-essay “discussions.” In fact, before even coming back to the site I forewarned Wayne, Tom Paul, and a number of other posters that I was coming back to openly, honestly, and frankly discuss Merion, and that my ideas would very likely be cutting against much of the accepted notion of Merion’s history. I even gave them a sampling of the kinds of contentions I would raise. I asked them, specifically, if they had any problem with any of that.
If Wayne Morrison or Tom Paul or anyone else thought that I needed to go to Merion first, then why did they not tell me so before? Everyone had ample opportunity to do so.
The fact is, this whole notion is being used as yet another distraction to detract from the substance of my essay, and as an excuse for Wayne and TEPaul to continue to try and trash me and my essay without allowing me to verify any of their claims.
From TEPaul:
Re: David Moriarty's excellent The Missing Faces of Merion is now posted under IMO
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2008, 11:26:31 am »
Thanks Ran and David! I, for one, am glad this "White Paper" is finally here.
I haven't had a chance to do more than scan it but I'm looking forward to analyzing the credibility of particularly this idea that H.H. Barker essentially routed the land that is Merion East golf course and that Macdonald and Whigam (and/or Barker) essentially "designed" the holes that basically became Merion East.
THAT, most certianly is something that the history of Merion GC does not contemplate or remotely mention in any way, or ever has to my knowledge, regarding the creation of Merion East, the golf course. As to whether that is just unsupportable speculation promoted by a series of preceding events, or is, in fact, something about which there is some hard provable evidence, I guess we will just have to see with some really good analyses of all the other information extant about the creation of Merion East golf course.
David, that looks to be a lot of work, and congratulations from me on doing it all. We're certainly looking forward to analyzing it carefully, but I should note here and now that simply doing a lot of work (analogous example---Tom MacWood's five part essay entitled "Arts and Crafts Golf") both shouldn't and won't NECESSARILY pass in and of itself as indicating an accurate historical reexamination of Merion East's golf course and its entire creation, or anything else, for that matter.
Let's have a really good AND CIVIL analysis of and dicussion on this paper!
« Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 11:29:55 am by TEPaul »
From Wayne Morrison:
Re: David Moriarty's excellent The Missing Faces of Merion is now posted under I
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2008, 02:34:08 pm »
David,
I congratulate you for putting forth such a tremendous effort, and to think this is only part 1. You must have had access to board records of the Cricket Club that I have not yet seen. While my research has concentrated on Wm Flynn's work subsequent to the opening of the East Course (he was not present for the initial construction of the course), I am keenly interested in the earliest iteration of the East Course. If possible, I would like to have a look at some of the primary assets you utilized in the making of this essay. Reading the article (I must do so in a more thorough fashion) clearly indicates that you have material on hand that I have never seen and which the club is unaware. I guess you found the Sayers scrapbooks as some information you mentioned is contained in there.
I have found some inconsistencies and errors in my initial review and hope to give it a more concerted effort over the next week or so. Before jumping to conclusions (as others have done) I want to give this report the consideration it deserves. I will be happy to share with you my findings. Clearly the record needs to include some of your discoveries though I am hesitant to say to what extent that history is revised by them. In fact, if your findings regarding Hugh Wilson's lack of design involvement proves correct (and I am not presuming that it does as yet) then it has some profound impacts on matters closer to my field of study.
I must say that I am concerned or rather alarmed by the quick rush to judgment by Ran, Tom H and others that agree with the findings without a more informed understanding of the course and its history and certainly without an exhaustive study of the essay. The only way they can agree with David's conclusions are if they take for granted or assume what he states is correct. While there are an awful lot of facts presented, and potentially very important ones at that, some of the conclusions are troublesome and require a great deal of consideration. Something that neither Ran nor Tom has done and on a subject that neither one of them knows very much about.
While the conclusions they say are obvious and proven may turn out to be for the most part true, any judgment to that effect is premature and poorly considered at this stage.
-
"We have been hearing on this site for years from the self-acclaimed Merion experts that they had searched everywhere, including in Merion's archives, for records relating to the origins of the East, but that there were none, and that they had probably all been destroyed in a flood. Again it was probably my mistake for believing this, but it was only after my essay was posted that I began to realize just how much important material had been overlooked, ignored, concealed, misrepresented, and/or misunderstood by those who had been making the representations concerning the complete absence of source material."
No, we never said that. What we did say is contained on this website, and a number of times. We said;
1. Our primary interest was researching Merion's architectural record that had to do with William Flynn because that's who we were writing a book about. Any significant architectural contribution to Merion East by Flynn probably began about 1914 and 1915 and the first drawings from him began about 1915 or 1916.
2. We said that for about 5-6 years we had in our possession over 1500 letters on Merion East's and West's agronomy but that there was practically zero architectural material from that early period beginning in 1910-1911 up until about 1915. This included those sketches and drawings and surveyor's maps that he was said to have returned from abroad with after seven months in 1910. In the last month or so we determined that the 1910 story abroad from which Wilson returned with those sketches and drawings and surveyor's maps may not have occured until up to a half century AFTER the creation of Merion East. David Moriarty did not discover or determine that---we did.
-
Curiosity finally got the best of me. With no pressing work left, and nothing on TV while in my hotel room, I fell victim to the Merion threads. I can only liken it to rubbernecking at an auto accident.
I realized what the impetus of the threads was, and headed over to David Moriarty’s essay on the “In My Opinion” section of the site (I would emphasize "Opinion"). As I have no dog in this fight, and really didn’t know the early history of Merion, I found it interesting, and appropriately footnoted with regard to source material. It’s obvious to me that a significant amount of work went into it, and that if follows a fairly common formula – identify an idea or conclusion, and support it with research, facts and logic.
What wasn’t obvious to me was any agenda, malice, or any significant leaps of faith.
I also noticed in the essay’s opening paragraphs that it had been reviewed by unnamed individuals, and obviously had been reviewed by Ran prior to it being posted.
Moving on to the threads, it became obvious that sides were drawn early. What was even more obvious was that those who questioned the essay did not dispute any of the factual evidence supporting the essay’s claims and contentions. What they questioned was Mr. Moriarty’s agenda, his scholarship, his historical research, his supposed lack of peer review, and his ethics. Forced to defend himself instead of his essay, Mr. Moriarty fell victim to one of the oldest political tricks in the book – move attention from the facts to the author and/or his motivations.
I saw that every time Mr. Moriarty tried to move the focus of the dialogue back to the essay – asking for any refuting evidence or opposing interpretations – he was rebuked and rebuffed.
I also saw him questioned about not sharing his research with Merion or the Merion “experts,” as if that had a direct relationship with the quality of his scholarship. I would contend that by sharing his hypothesis he invited input, and after posting anyone who had evidence contrary to the hypothesis could certainly have addressed the essay’s findings. I still haven’t seen anything specific, but those reading the threads have been asked to take a leap of faith accepting that the MCC archives have information that would turn the essay on its ear.
David Moriarty used the site for what it was intended, IMO – a vehicle to discuss aspects of gca, which includes the historical record. Plenty of good, well thought out questions were asked – but unfortunately not by those “defending” Merion. One I hope Mr. Moriarty will address, even with conjecture, is Mr. Shaffer’s regarding the lack of self-promotion by Macdonald and Wigham regarding their involvement with a course that was so highly regarded so early in its development.
What has struck me most after going through this mind-numbing exercise is the frankness with which Mr. Moriarty has defended his position throughout. I kept going back to Wayne Morrison’s first post after reading the essay, which stated that there were numerous facts but that the conclusions were “troublesome.” It seems that they were troublesome more because they changed the perceived historical context of Merion’s evolvement as opposed to being wrong, false, or indefensible.
-
David Moriarty
What the hell are you talking about – this post is about Wayne, nothing to do with you.
Just what is it with you, is it because I did not mention your name in every thread. Sorry David, you are not even in my thoughts let alone in this post.
As for the quote, again it was not aimed at you. It was a statement of fact.
Just read my comments with an open mind. Man, have you got some serious problems.
To all those who disagreed with my comment, ‘Reflects badly on all
of us’, I am minded of the following quote,
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing”
Make of it what you will, but this was a post to try and show
what we are loosing with the departure of Wayne Morrison. His
leaving is our loss. We have been unable to persuade him to stay,
a reflection of our collective failure of persuasion and of our unity
as a (internet) discussion group.
I have not said why Wayne was thinking of leaving the site. I don’t know. All I am saying is that he should stay and participate in GCA.com. David, stop trying to put words into my mouth. If I have something to say to you I will address you, or just not respond if I feel it more appropriate.
I don’t know you - never corresponded with you before your return to GCA.com. I had a totally open mind and was interested in what you had to say. In fact, I was impressed with the depth of research you clearly undertook for your essay. As for the content of your document, I cannot comment as I don’t know the history of Merion or any of the American clubs, and was interested in finding out. However, one thing I did noticed very quickly, was the way you constantly complained, whining and playing that poor little boy act. In fact, I wondered why you had return to GCA.com. Had you decided to seek some sort of revenge?
No David, this post is not about you. It’s about a guy who has proved his quality by showing his kindness and his willingness to help others. Trying to persuade him to stay is all it’s been about. Nothing more, nothing less.
Please, let's get back to the point of my post - Wayne Morrison remaining at GCA.com. It's not about Merion or David Morarity - I have had enough of both of them for the time being.
-
Re: Wayne Morrison departure from GCA.com reflects badly on all of us
is pure hyperbole.
I regret that Wayne has withdrawn from the site but I had nothing to do with it, nor did several hundred other contributors.
Matt,
Yours is quite the best post of the lot.
Wayne, Tom and David are very smart men and passionate in their beliefs, I have met two of them and it pains me to see friends at odds with each other. I daresay that kiss and make up is not in the cards but a respite from this feud would be a positive for GCA.
Bob
-
Re: Wayne Morrison departure from GCA.com reflects badly on all of us
is pure hyperbole.
I regret that Wayne has withdrawn from the site but I had nothing to do with it, nor did several hundred other contributors.
Matt,
Yours is quite the best post of the lot.
Wayne, Tom and David are very smart men and passionate in their beliefs, I have met two of them and it pains me to see friends at odds with each other. I daresay that kiss and make up is not in the cards but a respite from this feud would be a positive for GCA.
Bob
Amen Bob, well spoken.
Too bad you didn't chime in earlier. You said all that needs to be said in that brief post and we could have saved 4 pages of going back and forth and ended it with that.
-
Melvyn:
Bob is right - to say this reflects badly on all of us is indeed hyberbole. The vast majority of participants here had nothing to do with the events that lead to his departure, as Bob says. But on top of that, I firmly believe that there's little if anything any of us could have done to prevent it, and it's unseemingly if not ineffective to beg him to come back now. He's a grown man, and no begging ought to have any effect. He left and that's that. Like I said, it's happened many times before. Wayne may come back - as most do - but he may not. I hope he does - my exchanges with him have always been educational and great fun. If he does not, it is a shame.
But there's nothing any of us innocent bystanders can do - or really should do - one way or the other.
Thus my incredulity about your topic here, and your references to evil and the like. Heck, in the end it's just talk about golf courses. Which of course to me is the saddest part of all... when a seemingly innocuous subject leads to such hard feelings. But that's for the participants to ponder, not us bystanders.
Tom H.
-
I agree with these last three posts (Bob, Kalen, Tom). I too had a few pleasant exchanges with Wayne over a variety of topics and certainly hope that at some point he rejoins GCA.
Something tells me if we'd stick to talking about golf courses that we'd lose fewer participants in the long run.
-
"Wayne has produced the text of one letter that negates one of my inferences and this will have an impact on other portions of the essay as well. Others have had some productive comments and inputs, and I have reconsidered a few things, and found a few errors or unsupported points as well. Tom MacWood found the article that proves some of my analysis was correct but in doing so renders some of it moot, and I have not decided whether or not to leave those portions.
The main thing is that there is obviously much more out there and it definitely will impact my essay and it seems absurd to make the changes now and then more changes when I get access to what these guys are working on. I just don't see that there could be much wrong with my essay, otherwise wouldn't Merion and even these guys want to get the information out there that would correct it?"
I don't know that there is definitely much more out there. But these MCC meeting minutes and documents supporting the things those minutes indicate do make it clear to me what happened and when and why and who did it. I would say it certainly is absurd to try to make changes to your essay now. We are in no particular hurry to get information out there that would correct your essay as we feel through even these lugubrious Merion threads following your essay it's pretty clear what happened and what didn't. As far as much being wrong with your essay I think these particular points are included in what's wrong with it:
1. Macdonald/Whigam did not do their own routing or design for Merion East, certainly not in 1910 and not in 1911. What they did do is advise the search committee on the suitablility of land in June 1910, they had the committee to NGLA in 1911 for seemingly a day and a half in which sketches from abroad and plans for NGLA were gone over and explained and the next day the committee was taken out on NGLA and the principles of architecture were discussed and how to apply them to natural features and such. In early April Macdonald and Whigam came to Ardmore for a single day and went over the plans created by Wilson and his committee, they toured the grounds, they then selected one of those plans that they described as containing the best last seven holes of any inland course in the world (later reported in the newspaper). The committee gave that plan to the board and it was approved and construction began.
2. The Francis event did not occur in 1910 because for various reasons to do with the business structure and land transfer details it couldn't have happened before the turn of the year.
3. Your premise that Francis' idea created that entire triangle is not true. The triangle existed on the plans and the "planned" road was merely reconfigured up and down its length in 1911 to better accommodate the holes on the plan up and down Golf House Road. The road was eventually built in 1912. The triangle was merely reconfigured slighly to fit #15 green and 16 tee up into. Before and after plans with precise scales on them confirm this completely.
4. Your premise that Wilson was too much the novice to create a routing and design plan for Merion East just doesn't matter. The fact is the board minutes indicate that Wilson and his committee did DESIGN Merion East just as his brother Alan Wilson reported in his report for Merion's first history writer; "Except for this, the entire responsibility for the DESIGN and construction of the two courses rests upon the special construction committee....." The "Except for this" reference is to the advice and suggestions "those two good and Kindly sportsmen, Charles B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigam..." provided to the search committee on one occassion in 1910, on another occasion for a day and a half at NGLA to Wilson and his committee and on the last occasion for a single day in April 1911 to Wilson and his committee, all of which Merion was most grateful and said so in a few committee and board reports and in two later reports from the Wilson Brothers.
The foregoing four points and more indicate the architectural history as reported in the record of Merion East is correct and accurate as we have always maintained, with the exception of the 1910 trip abroad which I have already been over and the fact that he really did go abroad in 1912 which never has been reported in Merion's history.
(These are my opinions of events as I feel they happened from all the material I have seen. I am not at this time suggesting they are proof. Matter of fact, as others have done, I doubt I will ever claim I'm offering proof---merely the most informed opinion I can give from whatever it is I've seen. I think that is all this discussion board should do. I do not consider this place to be remotely similar to a court of law and this board should never be put to that test, and no one should claim that it should be, in my opinion)
So to save yourself time and effort I'd suggest that you just wait for these MCC documents to be released probably in our report which will certainly go into the Merion G.C. archives. But I would certainly be willing to make the request that the total wording in the MCC documents that we will use in our report be send to you first thing following the report. There is certainly no reason for you to have to travel to Philadelphia. But please understand that is not my call or my decision to make--it's Merion's and Wayne's, as far as I'm concerned. But I will at least make it if it helps end all this rancor which has gone on for so long.
-
Bob/Kalen/Andy/Tom
You may well have a point, you had nothing to do with it – it’s been a total waste of my time.
Nothing worth fighting for, I’ll just live in my little world, what a waste of 4 pages.
Sorry Guys did not intend to cause you a problem and I apologise to all those who feel the same way. I should not have used the wording ‘It reflects badly upon all of us’.
This post started with the hope of persuading Wayne to stay but has now got me wondering if I want to be a part of GCA.com.
-
Dr. Katz. STAT!
-
Dr. Katz. STAT!
Oh, the humanity!
For the love of God, get the one doctor who can help this situation...
"Paging Dr. Daniels, Dr. Jack Daniels."
-
" What was even more obvious was that those who questioned the essay did not dispute any of the factual evidence supporting the essay’s claims and contentions."
MattD:
I beg your pardon. We most certainly did question the essay's claims and contentions very specifically and the factual evidence supporting those claims and contention. For starters just look at the four numbered points I just made in post #122. His only responses were he was right and we were wrong. I believe this material when released will indicate to most everyone who was wrong and who was right.
Thanks
-
Melvyn:
If this causes you to leave, that too would be a shame.
But yes, in the end this may have been a waste of time.
If you do stay, you'll see why over time. People come, people go. It's happened time and time again. Persuading them to stay doesn't work, at least not with anyone worth keeping. And in fact, if it makes you feel better, what's happened in the past is that the more one announces he's leaving, the more likely he is to return. The ones who never come back tend to be those who just plain stop posting, with no announcement.
So we shall see about Wayne. I don't feel like I've seen the last of him. If so that would be shame. But like I say, me begging him to come back wouldn't matter a bit anyway.
In any case, I doubt any of us are being insensitive; rather we are being realistic and speaking from experience. And you caused no problem for any of us, I believe.
TH
-
My Dear Mr Kelly---Dr Jack Daniels works for me
-
I beg your forgiveness---Mr Kelley please inform Mr Ferrell Dr Jack Daniels works for me
-
One thing that I have always strayed away from on this forum is making any kind of a statement that might relfect on the integrity of a golf club or the golf course superintendent of that club.
It does baffle me how anyone could write something that calls into question the very heritage and corporate identity of a club without making any contact with that club first. I think it is extremely bad form to do that.
Members of country clubs regard their club as an extension of their home. This is lreally like a family matter, isn't it?
Merion has opened its club up to the entire world for evaluation time and time again. My goodness, there isn't another club on the planet more deserving of first right of refusal to objecting to having their legends publically challenged than Merion is.
I will repeat what I have said on other threads about this issue. The veracity of those who have defended Merion is entirely approriate.
-
Katz, you insufferable charlatan, are you still on this website? I thought we got rid of your sorry incompetent, malpracticing ass a couple of years ago!!!
-
I'm just wondering how many people read certain posts and think, "What the heck is that guy reading? He's sure not reading what I'm reading."
No need to name names, I'm just starting to wonder if maybe English isn't my native tongue after all.
-
Tom,
I respectfully disagree, in that I cannot interpret your questions and concerns as disproving any points raised in the essay - they only provide your perspective on the facts as you know them, and beg for documented back-up. That's my primary contention - while Mr. Moriarty can back up his conclusion with a timeline and documentation, his detractors say he isn't right and tell everyone to wait for proof. If that's the case, you would have been better served by stating the points you expected to disprove and providing a timeframe when you would be able to do so. While there were intimations, there was nothing definitive.
Matt
-
Bradley:
If you have never met Merion's super, Matt Shaeffer, you have got to do it. What a great sense of humor he has and like all the time! I want to have the honor of introducing you. If I went over there and actually asked him what he thinks of all this mess on these Merion threads I know exactly what he'd do. He's just stand there with that wry smile on his face and shake his head slowly for about a minute. Then he would probably say; "YA Know, why don't you just stop wasting time and come out here at 6am every day and go to war on my grass with me?"
-
Bob/Kalen/Andy/Tom
You may well have a point, you had nothing to do with it – it’s been a total waste of my time.
Nothing worth fighting for, I’ll just live in my little world, what a waste of 4 pages.
Sorry Guys did not intend to cause you a problem and I apologise to all those who feel the same way. I should not have used the wording ‘It reflects badly upon all of us’.
This post started with the hope of persuading Wayne to stay but has now got me wondering if I want to be a part of GCA.com.
Melvyn,
See Tom's most recent response to you. I again agree with what he's said. You've caused me no ill, and I applaud your intention. I hope you choose to stay as well; your contributions are beneficial to the group.
-
"I respectfully disagree, in that I cannot interpret your questions and concerns as disproving any points raised in the essay - they only provide your perspective on the facts as you know them, and beg for documented back-up. That's my primary contention - while Mr. Moriarty can back up his conclusion with a timeline and documentation, his detractors say he isn't right and tell everyone to wait for proof. If that's the case, you would have been better served by stating the points you expected to disprove and providing a timeframe when you would be able to do so. While there were intimations, there was nothing definitive."
Matt:
I'm sorry but David Moriarty does not and apparently cannot back up his conclusion or his contentions with any factual documentation. It is simply conjecture on his part. There is no routing by Macdonald presented by him and there's no documentation or evidence presented by him that there ever was one. His timing and logic of the Francis event is merely conjecture on his part. There is no documentation provided by him that it took place in 1910 or that Francis was "tweaking :) Macdonald's routing before November 15, 1910. His triangle theory has been completely disproved by truly factual evidence from surveyors. His only response is they must have been wrong. He has provided no documentation that Hugh Wilson could not have done the routing and design with his committee in 1911. It is only his conjecture that he must have been too much the novice to do it. This is not fact at all or documentation from anywhere or anyone other than Moriarty's own notion, none of it is documentation or factual, merely conjecture and it does not square with Merion's documentation that hopefully will be provided soon.
-
Gentlemen,
I come late, and blessedly so, to this catfight. I have not read the original Merion discussion, if that is the right term, but I must say that if it has carried on so heatedly that a wonderful contributor to other threads has decided to leave because of the tone of the argument, then the argument is quite out of hand.
Good luck in trying to get the poop off your shoes.
As for me, I look forward to eventually getting in touch with Wayne on the history of Flynn's involvement with a couple of courses in the Chicago area. But I'll do so privately, out of the line of fire.
Wishing you civility now and in the future.
-
Oh boys, Boys, sssszzzt, BOYS!! By the way Boys, maybe you should all stop arguing about who's fault it IS or whose fault it ISN'T that Wayno Morrison, arguably the world's most accomplished combined golf architecture analyst/Pissboy left this website. Perhaps he has not really left after-all. I found him asleep in a little used shoe closet about 11:13 last night where he'd apparently been for up to 37 hours. Somebody on here must have just ASSUMED he left the site. I think he's still here even if we may not be able to easily find him at any particular point in time. For instance, yesterday he said he was in Princeton most all day doing some incredibly top-notch business/finance stuff and after that he apparently went out with some politically conservative Princeton professors and did some Class A possum-giggin' under the light of the silvery moon. That may be the case but I haven't yet figured out how he could've been asleep in that shoe closet throughout approximately the same time. I think the whole thing should be submitted to some tautological test. Maybe he won't leave, maybe he just won't post. But who the hell really knows, as Wayno is one of the most spontaneous guys any of you have ever seen. So spontaneous, in fact, it seems like he can be in two places at the same time.
Frankly, he just might be $UPERMAN.
-
Hang in there Wayne, the ground my be muddy but there are many of us who need your input .
Put your rubbers on !
-
I knew I was in the presence of somebody that knew a LOT more about GCA than I the first time I played with Wayne.
We were playing the 11th hole at Rolling Green. A really beautiful, difficult hole. We get to the green and Wayne says, "look back an tell me who's work this reminds you of.." I made a naive "guess" and he spent about 5 minutes explaining the correct answer. Wayne is first and foremost a teacher and a mentor. To me, he's pure class, and I want to be just like him when I'm as old as he is :)
There's a lot more I could say, but I'll pass because I respect him too much.
-
I knew I was in the presence of somebody that knew a LOT more about GCA than I the first time I played with Wayne.
We were playing the 11th hole at Rolling Green. A really beautiful, difficult hole. We get to the green and Wayne says, "look back an tell me who's work this reminds you of.." I made a naive "guess" and he spent about 5 minutes explaining the correct answer. Wayne is first and foremost a teacher and a mentor. To me, he's pure class, and I want to be just like him when I'm as old as he is :)
There's a lot more I could say, but I'll pass because I respect him too much.
Well put Dan. You've echoed my exact thoughts.
-
Tom Paul,
That would be great to meet Matt Shaeffer. I would like to do some kind of golf trip this fall with a bunch guys on our green committee, and coming out your way would be one hell of trip.
Do you have a golf course out there that favors a really bad slice off the tee?
You have, behind the scenes helped me and encouraged as a golf course superintendent. No one on this site would even know that. I have never called Wayne, but I have no doubt that he would have helped me as much as you have.
People who think that you two are disputatious are just crazy.
I've learned so much about what is golfish from what you and Wayne have posted on this site. For a long time I just keyed in on your posts and Wayne's.
Pass this on to Wayne: that a weed picker appreciates him here and would like him back.
-
There are no facts of David Moriarty's that anyone every questioned.
We only questioned his conclusions, that he based on his interpretation of those facts.
I am incredulous that someone can come here and say that they've now "read the Merion thread" and have it all figured out in a day.
Heck, it took us about 3 months each to type it!
Steve,
I say this because you are my friend.
I see you questioning David as to why Macdonald himself didn't ever claim to have designed Merion. As a lawyer yourself, I know you can intuitively sense where he's going with his initial answer, and you have more odds of actually getting a reality based response or a serious, reasonable dialogue going on these matters with.....oh...never mind.
Some months ago I saw where this whole thing was going and announced that I'd had enough of this thread. Sean Arble, who was uninitiated in the futility, ridiculousness, and assininity of the first Merion discussions told me he was enjoying it and essentially pulled me back into the fray.
I think Sean is a wonderful contributor, but I would also say that 95% of you out there have no idea of the backdrop to this sad tale, nor the behind the scenes manuevering, politics, and agendas coming to the surface here. Like the Titanic Iceberg that Hugh Wilson narrowly averted, you're only seeing the 10% on the surface.
So Steve...before you get sucked into this vortex, I have just three words for you...
Run...RUN...RUN!!!!
Save yourself Man...
To see David come back here after several years portraying himself as the victim is almost too frustrating to watch.
To see people here who I respect having more sympathy for David than for a guy like Wayne who has been so generous with his time, so generous in his help of those visiting town, and so generous in his sharing of his voluminous broad-based research that dwarfs the teeny-weeny agenda-driven, positivist paper that David wrote is simply unfathomable.
-
Matt Dupre,
Since you have read the relevant material and it is still fresh enough in your mind to render a very clear opinion, can you provide an executive summary of David's conclusions, the facts he provided, and the irrerfutable evidence?
You say, "It’s obvious to me that a significant amount of work went into it, and that if follows a fairly common formula – identify an idea or conclusion, and support it with research, facts and logic." But what happens when the "facts" and the logic do not support the initial idea? Shouldn't a conclusion be the culmination of the research instead of leading where it goes?
You talk about agendas. How do we know what is in men's hearts? The best we can do is to draw inferences from what is presented with the knowledge that there is a great probability of being wrong.
I have not seen Merion, but I am told by people whose opinions I trust that it bears very little resemblance to anything that Macdonald or Raynor have done. The single claim by Whigman (that CBM designed Merion) has been discussed sufficiently and I don't think carries much weight. If Merion does not look like a Mac/Raynor course and if CBM never claimed credit for it, what would drive someone to devote hundreds of hours to show that it was? I trust that is is only intellectual curiousity.
As to Wayne Morrison leaving, that's his doing. He will either be back or he won't. The issue of collective responsibility for an individual deciding to do something else is mindboggling.
And I agree with George Pazin. Sometimes I think our reading comprehension is very poor or the elasticity of our language is such that communicating with any precision is impossible. Perhaps it is one of President Clinton's legacies- "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". I do think we have a tendency on this site to promote mere opinions and theories as facts.
-
By the way, Steve...
Matt Dupre must have really read those threads carefully if he thought your question about Macdonald never claiming responsibility was fresh and new. I know you were simply asking it as one of the germane, overriding points that has never been answered to any degree of reasonable satisfaction, and the fact that it is simply preposterous to think Macdonald would have simply neglected to ever mention it when the course hosted 3 US Amateurs and a US Open during his lifetime. Yet Matt thinks it's the first time it's been asked! ::)
Going back over the 5 years of this crap, that inconvenient truth has probably only been pointed out 6 or 7 hundred times. ;)
-
David and Phil,
I think any responsible editor who have required a Merion contact first to see if their archives or even MCC had any information to the contrary.
I realize that David's essay is a work in progress and regret that it took the course that it did on this site. When will the revision take place now that "broad based peer review" has taken place? I would imagine there will be many asterisks given that MCC won't permit further access and/or publication beyond that which WM has provided.
I objected to Ran's use of the word "excellent" in the heading as well to no avail.
My basic reaction from the beginning was why didn't CBM himself write about his consultations with the Merion committee. I find it difficult to imagine that CBM did not publicize his Merion involvement if it was indeed more than just a consultation.
Steve
You made quite few statements there. Did CB Macdonald write about his other consultations?
Based upon your research of the early years who in your view designed Merion, and what role did Macdonald play?
What is your feeling about the timing of Wilson's trip to the UK?
Did you complain to Ran about his 'excellent' description? What do you make of Ran's architectural and historical accumin?
-
Steve,
Run like Hell, man....
As tempting as this is to answer, and as reasonable as you might think your conclusions are to anyone with an objective, unbiased viewpoint...
RUN!!!! :o
-
Matt Dupre,
Since you have read the relevant material and it is still fresh enough in your mind to render a very clear opinion, can you provide an executive summary of David's conclusions, the facts he provided, and the irrerfutable evidence?
You say, "It’s obvious to me that a significant amount of work went into it, and that if follows a fairly common formula – identify an idea or conclusion, and support it with research, facts and logic." But what happens when the "facts" and the logic do not support the initial idea? Shouldn't a conclusion be the culmination of the research instead of leading where it goes?
You talk about agendas. How do we know what is in men's hearts? The best we can do is to draw inferences from what is presented with the knowledge that there is a great probability of being wrong.
I have not seen Merion, but I am told by people whose opinions I trust that it bears very little resemblance to anything that Macdonald or Raynor have done. The single claim by Whigman (that CBM designed Merion) has been discussed sufficiently and I don't think carries much weight. If Merion does not look like a Mac/Raynor course and if CBM never claimed credit for it, what would drive someone to devote hundreds of hours to show that it was? I trust that is is only intellectual curiousity.
As to Wayne Morrison leaving, that's his doing. He will either be back or he won't. The issue of collective responsibility for an individual deciding to do something else is mindboggling.
And I agree with George Pazin. Sometimes I think our reading comprehension is very poor or the elasticity of our language is such that communicating with any precision is impossible. Perhaps it is one of President Clinton's legacies- "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". I do think we have a tendency on this site to promote mere opinions and theories as facts.
Lou
What is your opinion regarding the impact of Hugh Wilson's trip overseas, and the timing of that trip (1910 vs 1912)? Is the timing of trip germain to the history? Why or why not?
-
Lou,
You too, my friend.
RUN!!!
The most dense Black Hole in the universe has less sucking power and is more productive to enter than trying to engage this nonsense.
Like Lot's wife should have done, don't look back!
Someday, when we reach a better place on some future shore, you'll thank me.
-
Steve
You made quite few statements there. Did CB Macdonald write about his other consultations?
Based upon your research of the early years who in your view designed Merion? What role did Macdonald play?
What is your feeling about the timing of Wilson's trip to the UK?
Did you complain to Ran about his 'excellent' description? What do you make of Ran's architectural and historical accumin?
Tom,
Do you think that CBM only consulted on the routing of Merion,or are you with David M in asserting that he must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?
-
Mike
There is no reason for Steve to run like hell. I just wanted to know what he was basing his opinions upon. You have to admit his post is packed with opinion. It seems to me there have been a lot of opinions expressed and not much substance to support the opinions. Inquiring minds would like know.
-
Bradley,
Do you really think you'll get a straight answer?
As long as the rest of us keep engaging this nonsense, it will never end.
David Moriarty and Tom MacWood have offered their opinions.
Let's just see how they ultimately stand up to historical review.
Continuing to argue this is pissing into the wind. You have a better chance of pushing a rhinocerous backwards up Mount Kilamanjaro than to engage in a productive dialogue here.
-
Steve
You made quite few statements there. Did CB Macdonald write about his other consultations?
Based upon your research of the early years who in your view designed Merion? What role did Macdonald play?
What is your feeling about the timing of Wilson's trip to the UK?
Did you complain to Ran about his 'excellent' description? What do you make of Ran's architectural and historical accumin?
Tom,
Do you think that CBM only consulted on the routing of Merion,or are you with David M in asserting that he must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?
Where did David write CBM must have routed Merion?
-
Mike C - ah hell, I guess I've got nothing better to do, at least not right at this moment.
Tom M - please, please stop asking people what they think about the timing of the Wilson trip. No less a thinker and writer and gentleman than Mr. Bob Crosby (philosopher, lawyer, man for all seasons, and my hero) answered that question -- and refuted the logic of the underlying assumptions -- a few days ago; and needless to say, he answered it well, and in my opinion definitively. As you know, no one at the time of Merion's design and construction -- including all those who credited Wilson with that design -- made any such trip to the UK by Wilson a prerequisite, nor did they use it as an explanation. And really, this "if his brother got that part wrong then his whole report falls apart" line of thinking is really beneath you.
Peter
(sorry, Tom, I used the wrong intial for your last name again; made it right now)
-
"Further, Macdonald and Whigham had sent their advice as to what could be done with the land in a letter, so at the NGLA meeting they were all likely working out the particulars of the golf holes that Macdonald and Whigham had envisioned. "
Please let's not mince words to suggest that David never said M&W didn't route Merion.
Please, Tom...this is so stupid.
-
Mike C - ah hell, I guess I've got nothing better to do, at least not right at this moment.
Tom W - please, pease stop asking people what they think about the timing of the Wilson trip. No less a thinker and writer and gentleman than Mr. Bob Crosby (philosopher, lawyer, man for all seasons, and my hero) answered that question -- and refuted the logic of the underlying assumptions -- a few days ago; and needless to say, he answered it well, and in my opinion definitively. As you know, no one at the time of Merion's design and construction -- including all those who credited Wilson with that design -- made any such trip to the UK by Wilson a prerequisite, nor did they use it as an explanation. And really, this "if his brother got that part wrong then his whole report falls apart" line of thinking is really beneath you.
Peter
Peter
I don't recall Bob's opinion. What did he say?
Yesterday I spoke with a person familar with the West course at Merion, and he agreed with Mike Cirba, that the course is significantly weaker than the East. In his opinion it is not a well designed golf course. I believe Wilson's next design was Seaview, which was remodelled two years after he completed it by Donald Ross and Wilfred Reid. Do you believe Hugh Wilson was capable of designing one of the great courses in America in 1912? Why or why not?
-
Tom MacWood,
Where did David say who did route Merion?
-
Peter
I don't recall Bob's opinion. What did he say?
Yesterday I spoke with a person familar with the West course at Merion, and he agreed with Mike Cirba, that the course is significantly weaker than the East. In his opinion it is not a well designed golf course. I believe Wilson's next design was Seaview, which was remodelled two years after he completed it by Donald Ross and Wilfred Reid. Do you believe Hugh Wilson was capable of designing one of the great courses in America in 1912? Why or why not?
Tom,
My god man...do you hear yourself?
Now you're going to try to turn it around to suggest because the West course, built as an overflow course, and Seaview, which simply had some bunkering added by others while Wilson was too busy with business were not up to the standard of the East course as we know it today somehow makes Wilson a feeble architect?
Peter Palotta is right...you're way better than this.
Whatever somewhat understandable bitterness you might have with Tom Paul and Wayne Morrison has really affected you in a very negative way and I'm personally very sorry to see it.
-
"Further, Macdonald and Whigham had sent their advice as to what could be done with the land in a letter, so at the NGLA meeting they were all likely working out the particulars of the golf holes that Macdonald and Whigham had envisioned. "
Please let's not mince words to suggest that David never said M&W didn't route Merion.
Please, Tom...this is so stupid.
You are right. He definitely wrote M&W routed Merion, and no doubt DM is mistaken that M&W would have had any influence upon the use of the protypical holes, especially since Wilson studied abroad in 1910.
-
Tom MacWood,
We've both said enough.
I really appreciate our past dialogues, I've learned a great deal from you, and I think we share an equal passion for the subject.
Further discussion with you on this topic is simply digging a deeper hole to Hell.
Let's move on before the damage is irreparable, if it isn't already.
-
Mike
I said it was stylistically/aesthetically similar to British courses. I wrote the other day: "By the way I never said the West was the better of the two courses. Only that it exhibited a modern architectural aesthetic, not unlike the British model at the time, more so than the original East did. And that by the end of the process the East began to look very much like the West, from a stylistic point of view."
How good was Cobbs Creek? You pointed out the West was a 4 on the Doak scale. Is Cobbs better than Merion West?
-
Tom -
the short answer is "yes". First, because I believe that in those relatively early days of American golf course architecture the dedicated and hard-working and golf-playing amateur designer could, on occasion and depending on the site, produce something special -- even if we're assuming that the earliest iteration of Merion East was all that special. Second, because I've read some of the roughly contemperaneous accounts, and some of the Wilson report, and I have never read any convincing argument as to why I shouldn't take those accounts/report at face value; nor do I have any reason to believe that the men who gave Wilson credit were lying or had any reason to lie. Third, because Mr. Macdonald was no shrinking violet, and it was a small community of men these wealthy amateur-sportsmen, and that no one ever until Mr. Whigham at the time of CB's death claimed routing/design credit for Macdonald flies in the face of any reasonable view of the world and of human nature unless one accepts the one fact that makes sense of it all, i.e. that Macdonald didn't do more at Merion that what he was given credit for at the time.
On Bob's answer, I couldn't do it justice from memory (it was a beautifully constructed puzzle, and if I miss one piece it may fall part) -- and I honestly can't remember which of the Merion threads it was on
Peter
-
Tom,
Do you think that CBM only consulted on the routing of Merion,or are you with David M in asserting that he [CBM] must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?
Bradley
Exactly. Re-read your question.
-
A few random thoughts.
I must be a sick person, because as a result of this thread, I went back and read a good portion of the Missing Faces of Merion thread. I was trying to see exactly where it became more of a battleground than a discussion, and I didn't really find any specific turning point, except it seemed to turn not long after I stuck my face into it, so perhaps I should take responsibility.
Tom, in David's synopsis of his essay, he says "While Hugh I. Wilson is credited with designing the great Merion East course that opened in 1912, he did not plan the original layout or conceive of the holes. H.H. Barker first sketched out a routing the summer of 1910, but shortly thereafter Barker’s plans were largely modified or perhaps even completely replaced by the advice provided by the famous amateur golfers, C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham who provided their written opinion of what could be done with the land. Richard Francis and H.G. Lloyd of Merion also contributed to the routing plan." That seems pretty clear to me. Perhaps he never said that M&W alone produced the routing, but I don't feel like splitting hairs.
But I'll repeat what I said earlier, the facts and conclusions in David's essay were just the bones of contention, and it was the level of contentiousness that was really the problem issue. And I know contentiousness. A friend of mine at work wouldn't talk to me for a week because of a disagreement we had over the movie G.I. Jane. A woman in my office had to shush me and a different friend because we were arguing.........about the metric system.
-
Tom,
Do you think that CBM only consulted on the routing of Merion,or are you with David M in asserting that he [CBM] must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?
Bradley
Exactly. Re-read your question.
Bradley Anderson,
I hope you didn't buy the book because of me. I wasn't challenging you to buy it, but merely asked whether you had read any of the books before ridiculing them. I have not read any of the anti-Stratford works. I was given one of the books and plan to read it at some point, but honestly it is not really my interest.
I'll stay away from the one you are reading as it doesn't sound all that good.
DavidM,
You don't get off that easy. You have questioned the historical accuracy of the gospels, and I have led you to an author (R.C.Sproul) who is most adept at addressing your hit and run remarks. Now do the manly thing and read it. I'm slogging through my assingment because you challenged me to do so. Now you are honor bound to do the same. Except you will be reading real scholarsim while I'm stuck here reading twaddle.
Bradley, I am not sure exactly why you are reading the book you are reading. I really do not think I challenged you to read it. I've never read it, and don't care to. I'd have recommended a different one if you'd asked but frankly I have not even read the one I would have recommended. If I were you, I'd stop reading.
As for me reading R.C. Sproul, I am sure you mean well, but really it is not my cup of tea. So thanks, but no thanks.
I warned you guys.
Even Lewis Carroll is spinning in his grave.
-
Tom -
the short answer is "yes". First, because I believe that in those relatively early days of American golf course architecture the dedicated and hard-working and golf-playing amateur designer could, on occasion and depending on the site, produce something special -- even if we're assuming that the earliest iteration of Merion East was all that special.
Can you give us some examples of amateur architects from this period that had no help from experienced men?
Second, because I've read some of the roughly contemperaneous accounts, and some of the Wilson report, and I have never read any convincing argument as to why I shouldn't take those accounts/report at face value; nor do I have any reason to believe that the men who gave Wilson credit were lying or had any reason to lie.
What reports did you read? Do these reports mention M&W?
Third, because Mr. Macdonald was no shrinking violet, and it was a small community of men these wealthy amateur-sportsmen, and that no one ever until Mr. Whigham at the time of CB's death claimed routing/design credit for Macdonald flies in the face of any reasonable view of the world and of human nature unless one accepts the one fact that makes sense of it all, i.e. that Macdonald didn't do more at Merion that what he was given credit for at the time.
Did Macdonald mention his inolvement at Shinnecock Hills? Why not?
On Bob's answer, I couldn't do it justice from memory (it was a beautifully constructed puzzle, and if I miss one piece it may fall part) -- and I honestly can't remember which of the Merion threads it was on
Peter
Peter
Why is Merion East the only course Wilson's name is associated with that has any of the prototypical British holes/famous features?
There have been a lot of opinions expressed on these Merion threads, but not many facts to support the opinions.
-
Tom MacWood,
Where did David say who did route Merion?
He didn't. Did you ever decide to read it?
This is where Mike claims he did: "Further, Macdonald and Whigham had sent their advice as to what could be done with the land in a letter, so at the NGLA meeting they were all likely working out the particulars of the golf holes that Macdonald and Whigham had envisioned. "
-
Peter,
I have faith you can stand on your own here, but for your own sanity and peace of mind, I'm offering a hand to help pull you from the slippery slope I see you heading down.
Anyone with a friggin brain even remotely interested in GCA by 1911 knew what the prototype holes were from Great Britain. Whigham and others wrote about it and going to Europe was all the rage. There were concept and template holes going back to the 1890s based on the redan and alps.
At Merion...there is a "redan" that is/was nothing of the sort, an "alps" that wasn't blind, and an "eden" that was quicky discarded because it didn't work. Beyond that, there was a valley of sin, which was a feature not used on any M&W course.
That's it as far as template hole...period...ever...nothing else in the history of the course.
Take my hand....let me pull you from the icy water.
-
Peter
I'm going to bed. Obviously they prefer you not speak for yourself.
-
He didn't. Did you ever decide to read it?
This is where Mike claims he did: "Further, Macdonald and Whigham had sent their advice as to what could be done with the land in a letter, so at the NGLA meeting they were all likely working out the particulars of the golf holes that Macdonald and Whigham had envisioned. "
"While Hugh I. Wilson is credited with designing the great Merion East course that opened in 1912, he did not plan the original layout or conceive of the holes. H.H. Barker first sketched out a routing the summer of 1910, but shortly thereafter Barker’s plans were largely modified or perhaps even completely replaced by the advice provided by the famous amateur golfers, C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham who provided their written opinion of what could be done with the land. Richard Francis and H.G. Lloyd of Merion also contributed to the routing plan."
Tom,
Please don't insult our intelligence by trying now to imply that David didn't say that 1) Hugh Wilson did NOT route Merion and that 2) some combination of HH Barker and CB Macdonald/HJ Whigham DID.
I know he got that directly from YOU, so please...we're not stupid, even if events and further evidence do not support your conclusions.
I'm trying to defuse this so we can all leave gracefully.
Why the need on your part to keep this insanity going???
-
"Tom Paul,
That would be great to meet Matt Shaeffer. I would like to do some kind of golf trip this fall with a bunch guys on our green committee, and coming out your way would be one hell of trip."
Bradleyoh:
You just name the time and I'll make it happen. You and your green committee are going to really enjoy MattS. He is a stitch but his strong suit is he's about as informative and educational as a green committee could ever find anywhere. After playing the course we take you and your green committee into his office and he sits everybody down and asks: "How did you like it?" Of course everyone always says they loved it. Then he says: "Do you think you want something like I've got here?" And of course they always say they do. Then he says: "Ok, how many people do you have on your crew in-season?", and most say we have 15-20 and he says; "Well, I have about 50 and so if you want what I have here all you need to so is give Bradley the MONEY----let me repeat that, give him the MONEY or don't you dare expect to have what we have here---that's the deal for starters." And if anyone on your green committee is not understanding something he says or disagrees with it, MattS is always sitting right underneath his blackboard and he has his chalk at the ready and he is definitely ready to go into the "breakdown/breakout" details for them (MattS is a frustrated school teacher, there's just no doubt about it). Believe me, this guy is good and most importantly he's all for you, Bradley Anderson. Now, that's the offer but, if, for some reason the Pissboy Morrison is pissed at me we might need to reschedule or reconsider this, OK?
"Do you have a golf course out there that favors a really bad slice off the tee?"
Not that I can think of at the moment. We are basically all a bunch of whores and hookers here in Philadelphia. I thought you picked that up from MacWood and Moriarty.
"You have, behind the scenes helped me and encouraged as a golf course superintendent. No one on this site would even know that. I have never called Wayne, but I have no doubt that he would have helped me as much as you have."
Oh, I don't know about that. I've been thinking there's this huge connection between grass and architecture, particularly historically and it was you who helped me to put the reality to it. You have to understand, there are basically three things that scare the shit out of me---cooking, sailing and agronomy. Belay, that, smooth taking Southern women do too. But if you're trying to throw some flattery around, always throw it my way first---I'll deal with Wayno later since I taught him everything he knows anyway except about drugs.
"People who think that you two are disputatious are just crazy."
Maybe they're not crazy. I am disputatious, but it's generally by design and it mostly doesn't come off very well---at least not on here.
"I've learned so much about what is golfish from what you and Wayne have posted on this site. For a long time I just keyed in on your posts and Wayne's."
I think I catch your drift, Bradley, but watch out for words like "golfish"---it sounds a bit too much like a word a gaggle of mall-chicks would use. Let's just say we learn or we understand "GOLF". It's sort of like one must always say we "play golf" not we "go golfing" which is a total "no-no" in some circles which actually may not be that trustworthy anyway, so all I can say is----whatever.
"Pass this on to Wayne: that a weed picker appreciates him here and would like him back."
I will.
-
Tom - even if all those questions hadn't been looked at and answered and fought over a thousand times already (even, a few times, by me) are you sure you want to get into what "facts" there are to support the contention that M&W did more at Meron than they've traditionally been given credit for? You mention our "opinions". Well, you're smarter than me, and you know more about the history of golf course architecture than I do, and you are infinitely more involved in the study of that subject than I'll ever be -- but what I don't know about the early days of Merion doesn't put what you don't know about the early days at Merion in any better light....
Peter
Mike - always appreciate the help, but I was aware of all that and I think I may ave commented on that in a thread long ago and far away...but again, that's an example of what's characterized as "opinion" when a rookie like me says it and as "fact" when one of the experts claims the opposite...it doesn't bother me, as I have little ego attached to this, but ouch, when I get the Mucci touch....
-
Tom,
are you with David M in asserting that he [CBM] must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?
Mike
This was Brad's question. I don't believe DM's essay asserts CBM routed the course.
Now I'm really going to bed.
-
Tom - even if all those questions hadn't been looked at and answered and fought over a thousand times already (even, a few times, by me) are you sure you want to get into what "facts" there are to support the contention that M&W did more at Meron than they've traditionally been given credit for? You mention our "opinions". Well, you're smarter than me, and you know more about the history of golf course architecture than I do, and you are infinitely more involved in the study of that subject than I'll ever be -- but what I don't know about the early days of Merion doesn't put what you don't know about the early days at Merion in any better light....
Peter
Mike - always appreciate the help, but I was aware of all that and I think I may ave commented on that in a thread long ago and far away...but again, that's an example of what's characterized as "opinion" when a rookie like me says it and as "fact" when one of the experts claims the opposite...it doesn't bother me, as I have little ego attached to this, but ouch, when I get the Mucci touch....
I'm not a fan of you are smarter than me, you know than me defense. Make your case.
-
Guys, I can't believe you can't take this onto a Merion thread. This was supposed to be about Wayne's departure, not another 10 page thread on DM's essay or the rebuttals to it. I understand that Wayne's departure had something to do with this (despite me choosing not to participate, I have been paying attention), but take this to where it belongs before this turns into a thread as long as one of James Clavell's paperbacks with the same results.
-
Dan Hermann:
If you're going to say the things about Morrison you did in post #140 would you please send them to me first so I can edit them? The man was born with a size 8 1/2 hat size and his head definitely does not need any more expansion.
-
Tom Paul,
I like the word golfish and I'm keeping it in my vernacular. Isn't that a Wodehouse word?
Now I'm going to bed. And I vow to leave this subject. I think Mike C is right, this is done. GCA will die if this goes on and on.
Tommorro you should go mow your field and smell some new cut grass.
-
Gentlemen,
More years ago than I care to remember, I had a classics master teaching Greek, who when confronted with school boy passions and personal feuds reminded us of the word "irenic." You can look it up, it was all about reconciliation. I do wish that we could do that here.
At least let us try.
Bob
-
"To see people here who I respect having more sympathy for David than for a guy like Wayne who has been so generous with his time, so generous in his help of those visiting town, and so generous in his sharing of his voluminous broad-based research that dwarfs the teeny-weeny agenda-driven, positivist paper that David wrote is simply unfathomable."
Michael Cirba:
WHO-HA, that's a pretty strong brew to serve. Even I might not say that. The fact it's the total truth is secondary. ;) But you know, that's the deal, it really is. We just can't understand how or why so many on here would buy that specious garbage he put out there. In his defense all I can say is he really was dealing with about half the information on the subject and that put him and would put anyone else behind the 8-ball----ie anyone really should come to the club first and/or those who know most about it. But to me it's not the essay, it's the instransigence on his part that followed. I know, I know, we haven't produced the MCC documents but we will---just give it some time. If, at that point Moriarty is still singing the same old songs about the accuracy of his essay and a good slice of this website is still agreeing with it both Wayno and I really will be out of here and you should follow because what the's the point really---that really will be the epitome of denial?
-
Bradley. If Wodehouse used the word "golfish" I will deny for now and for all time to come I ever said it sounded "mall-chickish".
I will be mowing at first light tomorrow---the hay is getting a bit longish.
-
I'm not a fan of you are smarter than me, you know than me defense. Make your case.
Tom -
No. I've made my case -- or stated my opinions if you prefer -- several times on various threads; and all your questions have been answered, if not by me then by others. I won't go through it again. Why? Because you're starting to get me annoyed and angry. You manifest a certain unpleasent tendency, i.e. when posters state their opinions forcefully, you back down or ignore them; but when we offer opinions with a little more humility, you start playing rhetorical games and talking "tough". I guess you don't realize how funny the tough talk is coming from a golf course historian, or how it would strike someone like me. But I don't come to golfclubatlas to get annoyed or angry, so let's just leave it at that.
Peter
-
Peter, Tom, Kirk Gill or anyone out there who is aware of this kind of tendency ("I am smarter or better at research or anaylsis than you offense or defense) and is concerned about it----let's get a grip and a lid on it right now. There is no question at all this is exactly the way ALL those Merion threads started to devolve out of control over five years ago!
If you don't believe me I will pull some of them back up and show everyone exactly how and where and why that happened. We sure don't need more of that rancor and that is precisely how it first began----eg the implication that someone is a better researcher/analyst than someone else.
-
To see people here who I respect having more sympathy for David than for a guy like Wayne who has been so generous with his time, so generous in his help of those visiting town, and so generous in his sharing of his voluminous broad-based research that dwarfs the teeny-weeny agenda-driven, positivist paper that David wrote is simply unfathomable.
Mike,
I have never seen a more transparent quote in my life. You really need to step back and see how your quest to access courses where you do not belong is controlling your life. How many friends, relationships and employment opportunities are you going to lose before you wake up and smell a green fee?
-
This argument is asinine.
I'm calling for a moratorium on any further Merion "origin" discussion until such time that new evidence actually surfaces, if ever.
This has been the biggest waste of time and testosterone ever on GCA, and what little we've learned has been dwarfed by the agonizingly frustrating attempts to actually discuss and debate this issue.
David Moriarty and Tom MacWood have stated their opinions, with support from Patrick Mucci, Ran, Shivas, and probably a few others who I'm not recalling at the moment.
Some of us have stated our opinions.
There is nothing further to be argued...nothing more to be said that can be productive here.
I see attempts to suck guys like Steve Shaffer and Peter Palotta into a deeper hole of linguistic linguini and I'm warning from experience that no good can come of it.
Let's move on.
-
Wayne's departure could end up being a poor reflection on Wayne? David is doing what he does, arguing his case. With Wayne gone, David has the floor. Despite the rancor, the process is exactly what open discourse should be.
Wayne, Don't leave. They'll vote with Potter, otherwise
Agree on the Moriaritytorium.
-
Mike,
I have never seen a more transparent quote in my life. You really need to step back and see how your quest to access courses where you do not belong is controlling your life. How many friends, relationships and employment opportunities are you going to lose before you wake up and smell a green fee?
John,
You are a sick, twisted bastard who has not a clue about my life.
I've asked you repeatedly to leave me alone.
Twice in the past month I've driven 3 hours each way to pay $100+ green fees at Bedford Springs in western PA and Lake Presidential near DC. That you consider any of this your business is proof of your narcissism and arrogance.
Stay the f*ck out of my life and away from my posts.
If you're trying to drive me from this site, you won't succeed.
-
Melyvn,
Are you still reading this thread? If so, do you see how futile it is to ask the main players in these threads to stop, put it on the back burner, and cool off?
Everyone cares, they really do. Many have pleaded for them to stop, yet they continue on, and on, and on, and on, and on.
Its like a virus that infects half the threads in here and thats likely what most people have a beef with. If it was contained a little better, perhaps we'd just let them have thier little corner of cyberspace and duke it out. But this is not so!!!
-
Kalen,
See above...some of us have been begging for this to stop.
-
Mike,
I have never seen a more transparent quote in my life. You really need to step back and see how your quest to access courses where you do not belong is controlling your life. How many friends, relationships and employment opportunities are you going to lose before you wake up and smell a green fee?
John,
You are a sick, twisted bastard who has not a clue about my life.
I've asked you repeatedly to leave me alone.
Twice in the past month I've driven 3 hours each way to pay $100+ green fees at Bedford Springs in western PA and Lake Presidential near DC. That you consider any of this your business is proof of your narcissism and arrogance.
Stay the f*ck out of my life and away from my posts.
If you're trying to drive me from this site, you won't succeed.
Mike,
You are the one who said Wayne is a better man than David because he gets people on a great private course when they are in town. David has been very generous to me each time I visit LA. Sure we only meet and play a public course but that is not how I measure the worth of a friend.
-
Maybe it's the lawyer in me, but I can see merit in the positions of each of the enemy combatants. I can also see the passion that each is bringing to this forum. I am also aware of the collective hand-wringing that has ensued as a result of various people taking sides with one person or another. Finally, I have seen the hue and cry of people who are peeved that not everybody has chosen to "go with" one participant or another.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but eventually, somebody has to break up the dogfight and declare a truce. The hand-wringing has become more than a bit tedious, even if one acknowledges the obvious that one need not become engaged in this imbroglio and can easily avoid the conflict by going to other threads.
Problem is, this is the discussion group equivalent of a train wreck and we all know people can't take their eyes off a train wreck.
-
That is not what I said John.
For the last time, leave me alone.
-
Kalen,
See above...some of us have been begging for this to stop.
Mike,
I'd agree that at least you have been trying to get everyone to chill out and many of us appreciate that.
Unfortunatly, it continues on and really just goes to show that it doesn't really matter what the rest of us say and do, even from someone like you who these guys may actually listen to. At this point, Ran is the only one who can put an end to this I think.
-
That is not what I said John.
For the last time, leave me alone.
Mike,
I will make a deal with you. I will never talk to you or comment about your life on anything but a Merion thread. Keep starting and posting on these threads and you are fair game.
-
That is not what I said John.
For the last time, leave me alone.
Mike,
I will make a deal with you. I will never talk to you or comment about your life on anything but a Merion thread. Keep starting and posting on these threads and you are fair game.
Screw you, John.
You don't make the rules around here.
Leave me alone, and I will leave you alone, as I have been for a long time, except now and then trying to perhaps add a complimentary or encouraging word to you when you've posted something actually insightful and not purposefully hurtful.
I have no wish to discuss a damn thing with you ever again.
Leave me alone
-
Mike,
When Cobb's Creek builds a statue of you in front of the clubhouse will I be invited to the dedication?
-
For f$&*'s sake John.
Must you antagonize everyone all the time? Can't you give it a rest at least some of the time? Is it possible for someone to respect someone like Wayne without having to question alterior motives?
Can you please cease and desist from adding to this mess and try to be constructive at least part of the time? Hell we all know you can build a good road, but can you try to build some good comraderie and brothership in here instead of tearing it down?
-
For f$&*'s sake John.
Must you antagonize everyone all the time? Can't you give it a rest at least some of the time? Is it possible for someone to respect someone like Wayne without having to question alterior motives?
Can you please cease and desist from adding to this mess and try to be constructive at least part of the time? Hell we all know you can build a good road, but can you try to build some good comraderie and brothership in here instead of tearing it down?
Kalen,
If someone said this about a friend of yours would you let it go?
"To see people here who I respect having more sympathy for David than for a guy like Wayne who has been so generous with his time, so generous in his help of those visiting town, and so generous in his sharing of his voluminous broad-based research that dwarfs the teeny-weeny agenda-driven, positivist paper that David wrote is simply unfathomable."
Every word of the above reveals the dirty secret about GCA some of us have been fighting for years. Some peoples opinions are 90% access and 10% location. Given the price of fuel location becomes more important every day.
-
I did not realize until today that The Great Merion Championship BOUT is so large it actually has an UNDERCARD bout going on. Do we need some really good championship referees on here or some really good professional sociologists, or perhaps both? ;)
I saw that wingnut Dr Katz on here a day or so ago but he ain't worth his weight in salt to resolve anything.
-
John,
I suspect, though he can clarify, that Mike has known Wayne for awhile now and has likely already been invited to play many great courses. So what does Mike really have to additionally gain from this if his intentions are as you stated?
I don't know Wayne, but everything I've heard is that he really is a generous guy, and really does enjoy sharing what he has with others. What is so wrong with that when its the truth? All I see here is one friend going to bat for another when his integrity has been questioned by another.
But lets get down to the real issue here:
There is a concept in pyschology where we throw our own biases and notions upon others in terms of how we see the world and therefore think everyone sees the world the same way. The irnoic part is by your potraying Mike in this light, all you are doing is giving everyone a window into your mind of how you really feel about these things. These are your biases and thoughts, not his. This is really just all about you JK, its got nothing to do with Mike and what he said.
-
JohnK:
It's not about access, it's about scholarship, good or bad, and it's about the historical accuracy of the architectural history a great golf club. If someone like you wants to make it about playing access that's a whole different ball game but that has never been remotely connected to the Merion threads. The far larger "access" issue which seems to be constantly pushed by David Moriarty isn't remotely about playing access it's about access to a club's internal information.
Now, John, go build a really cool straight road somewhere and I'm going to go mow a field and commune with the bugs. After that I'm going to get in my car with Mark Petersen and drive to Pittsburgh and put my really big "access foot" squarely into Oakmont's door. ;)
-
"The irnoic part..."
Kalen:
Is "irnoic" some kind of early American Indian word? It sounds cool--what does it mean?
-
Not sure if this is the right forum or not, but now that Wayne is gone, is there anyone that can get me onto Merion?
;D
-
Gentlemen,
More years ago than I care to remember, I had a classics master teaching Greek, who when confronted with school boy passions and personal feuds reminded us of the word "irenic." You can look it up, it was all about reconciliation. I do wish that we could do that here.
At least let us try.
Bob
I looked it up at m-w.com:
irenic \ī-ˈre-nik, -ˈrē-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Greek eirēnikos, from eirēnē peace
Date: circa 1864
: favoring, conducive to, or operating toward peace, moderation, or conciliation
---------------
Note the date.
A bloody civil war was in progress in America when the word was coined.
Reconciliation (more or less, eventually) followed.
Perhaps that can happen here, as well.
I suggest the following tactic (or is it a strategy? emoticon omitted) to all of the combatants:
Let the other guy have the last word -- even if the other guy's last word is ignorant and offensive.
Dan
-
JC - do what I do - drive very slowly down Golf House road, look for an opening, and sneak on!
-
I did not realize until today that The Great Merion Championship BOUT is so large it actually has an UNDERCARD bout going on. Do we need some really good championship referees on here or some really good professional sociologists, or perhaps both? ;)
I saw that wingnut Dr Katz on here a day or so ago but he ain't worth his weight in salt to resolve anything.
Funny stuff.
All that's needed is a 19th Hole somewhere, with a few mediator types, and a bartender who will put the Ketel to the metal. Then the fur can fly and the dispute can be aired face-to-face and it should dissipate.
I know somebody who knows somebody who knows both Dr. Phil and Jerry Springer. If we throw in Maury and his lie detector, I think I can settle this here dispute!
-
JC - do what I do - drive very slowly down Golf House road, look for an opening, and sneak on!
Good call. I'll keep that in mind next time Im in Philly.
-
My mother has a simple question she asks---"Does it make you happy?".I assume leaving the site makes Wayne happy. That's why I say he has gotten smarter.
-
Come on Dan, that's nowhere near as effective as letting my little diarrehic dog (that Mucci has named Coorshaw) loose on the course.
I just go walk around any golf course no matter how private with my putter and a couple balls in hand. If anyone tries to stop me I just tell them: "You've got a choice, you can let me walk the course and find him or you can throw me off in which case he will probably deposit some really slimmy, smelly shit on each one of your greens and generally in or around the cups, so what'll it be?"
This is how I've been testing some of the greatest greens in the world for years.
-
priceless, Tom, priceless :)
-
"I know somebody who knows somebody who knows both Dr. Phil and Jerry Springer. If we throw in Maury and his lie detector, I think I can settle this here dispute!"
Terry:
Have your people contact my people and Wayne's people and Moriarty's people and MacWood's people and Springer and Dr Phil's people. I might get somebody's people to contact Geraldo's people.
I'd like to do a sitdown in the grillroom at Merion. But I'm gonna be bringing some pretty large "heavies" with me like Gil Hanse (6'6") and Mike Young (6' 3 13/16") and before we get into the sauce and settle this thing I do want a chance to have a chair-slinging free-for-all where hopefully I can punch out Moriarty and MacWood before they punch out me and the Pissboy.
-
Hey Tom,
I'm 6'2" and heavy in general, can I come too?
I haven't been in a good haymaker throwing, eye-gouging, sucker-punch throwing, knock em down, drag em out melee in quite some time. (Once your an adult, they tend to frown on that kinda stuff). I don't care who's side I'm on, it'd just be great to kick it old school and mix it up again!! Cause what happens at Merion, stays at Merion right?
OH and btw, can you please send a message to Wayne to invite me out a day early so i can play the course first? Kinda hard to play with sore knuckles and one eye half swollen shut.
P.S. Still looking up defintion for "irnoic" ;D
-
Those who know David Moriarty must be chuckling at this as well.
Let's just say David is not a small man.
You're best off keeping this to a war of words, Tom.
;)
-
"Hey Tom,
I'm 6'2" and heavy in general, can I come too?"
You can indeed, Kalen, but if you're not on my side throughout you better get your affairs in order before you go into Merion's grillroom.
-
Can I go and tape it for all the others to see?
-
Tom,
"I'm reawwlly scawwwed" in my best Elmder Fudd voice. I've been thru some bad neighboorhoods, been in some sketchy spots, even drove thru Oakland late one night, but thats all nothing. The Merions grillroom has really got me shaking in my boots!! ;D
As for whose side I'm on ... via a JK "projection", I'll be on whosever side gets me there a day early for a round of golf!! ;D
-
"You're best off keeping this to a war of words, Tom."
Ahh, bullshit, Huck. It's not me, it's my crew. Hell, I used to hang with a bunch of maniacs in the Marines and all I was ever assigned to do in baroom brawls and such is to go lock the door before all hell broke loose. For the longest time I couldn't figure out what the point of that was so finally I asked one of my Boys. He said; "It's so none of their friends can get in, you dipshit!"
True stuff here. I never saw them lose and they definitely had their technique down which was, first, let the other side do the talking and never say a word, second, always start the fight without a word (never let the other side start it), and third, I almost never saw those guys use their hands it was all with their feet. The other amazing thing is it never took more than about fifteen seconds.
-
Gents, I have zero doubt it would be a battle royal.
Just wanted you to know about at least one of your opponents, that's all.
;)
-
As for whose side I'm on ... via a JK "projection", I'll be on whosever side gets me there a day early for a round of golf!! ;D"
Well, fine Kalen. Do you think I'm some kind of idiot?? I don't see Moriarty or MacWood's side getting you any tees times---not early, not middle of the day, and not late. Basically not anything. The best those guys could do for you is maybe slip you a free cracker!
"I can swing a 1 iron in excess of 110 mph, and a head is much easier to hit than a Titleist.
Can I come, too?"
You can come too Shivas but not unless you can paint a "cheater line" on MacWood and Moriarty's forehead first.
-
I'll send these 2 (see below) to referee. They are my 2 younger brothers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA3cDUo2Tf8
-
Gents, I have zero doubt it would be a battle royal.
History will be written by the victors (if any).
-
"Just wanted you to know about at least one of your opponents, that's all."
Who's that Huckaby? Are you talking about Moriarty? I've met him and he didn't look like much to me except he seems to be one of those "modern" Californians who must live in some area out there where they don't have many razors. :P
-
I have a puckish sense of humour and a charming vunerability that tends to disarm my opponents...I'd like to come too.
Peter
-
Huck,
Unless Moriaty is either Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee all wrapped up in one or packing heat, I doubt he'll have much chance against all us heavies that Tom Paul will be lining up.
I'll just give him a quick kick to the nads and then sit on him and its game over!! ;D
-
I have a puckish sense of humour and a charming vunerability that tends to disarm my opponents...I'd like to come too.
Peter
Peter Pallotta, channeling David Sedaris.
-
"I have a puckish sense of humour and a charming vunerability that tends to disarm my opponents...I'd like to come too."
PeterP:
Damn you to hell----that is one of those remarks that's going to get me to wake up in the middle of the night and start laughing all over again---I know it is.
-
I'm just skimming and laughing but I must have missed an important post or two because I don't know who the reference 'Pissboy' refers to.
For the sake of those not in the melee... who be Pissboy? (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)
- Peter
-
I'm just skimming and laughing but I must have missed an important post or two because I don't know who the reference 'Pissboy' refers to.
For the sake of those not in the melee... who be Pissboy? (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)
- Peter
Could be any of 'em -- right?
-
I'll send these 2 (see below) to referee. They are my 2 younger brothers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA3cDUo2Tf8
Pretty cool stuff.
I've been practicing that exact move at the 1:15min mark on my 4 year old son.
-
"For the sake of those not in the melee... who be Pissboy?"
It would be Merion's own Wayno Morrison, Peter, arguably the most accomplished Pissboy in the entire Northeast, which is really saying something. And I don't think there's much question he's the best golf architecture analyst/Pissboy in the entire Universe.
-
"For the sake of those not in the melee... who be Pissboy?"
It would be Merion's own Wayno Morrison, Peter, arguably the most accomplished Pissboy in the entire Northeast, which is really saying something. And I don't think there's much question he's the best golf architecture analyst/Pissboy in the entire Universe.
CBM being a direct beneficiary of Mr. Morrison's prominence.
-
"For the sake of those not in the melee... who be Pissboy?"
It would be Merion's own Wayno Morrison, Peter, arguably the most accomplished Pissboy in the entire Northeast, which is really saying something. And I don't think there's much question he's the best golf architecture analyst/Pissboy in the entire Universe.
Tom,
Hmm, sounds like a moniker for a demented super hero. I am PissBoy - I've come to save the day!
I'm trying to NOT imagine the super hero outfit and what the super powers might be.
You guys are killin' me.
- Peter
-
I'm trying to NOT imagine ... what the super powers might be.
Let's start with firefighting.
-
Tom Paul,
I hope you aren't counting me in your crew.
-
Come on Dan, that's nowhere near as effective as letting my little diarrehic dog (that Mucci has named Coorshaw) loose on the course.
I just go walk around any golf course no matter how private with my putter and a couple balls in hand. If anyone tries to stop me I just tell them: "You've got a choice, you can let me walk the course and find him or you can throw me off in which case he will probably deposit some really slimmy, smelly shit on each one of your greens and generally in or around the cups, so what'll it be?"
This is how I've been testing some of the greatest greens in the world for years.
Is that what I keep finding on the 14th green at Aronimink? ;)