Golf Club Atlas

GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Neil_Crafter on September 19, 2014, 07:12:13 PM

Title: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 19, 2014, 07:12:13 PM
Around 18 months since the release of the 17th Revision, I'm pleased to announce that the 18th Revision is complete and released.

http://www.alistermackenzie.co.uk/Media/Default/Images/MackenzieChronology.pdf

Loads of new entries, mostly thanks to the marvels of digitised historic newspaper archives. Too many to mention, so if you have any interest in Mackenzie I'd suggest you download the PDF and take a read. Great front and back cover artwork by The Emperor, so many thanks for your efforts Tommy. A big thank you to my co-researchers Nick Leefe, Sean Tully, Mark Bourgeois, Niall Carlton and Mark Rowlinson.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Tim_Weiman on September 19, 2014, 09:51:08 PM
Neil,

Nice to see Tommy involved. Beautiful covers. Really interesting document.

Thanks to all involved in putting this together.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 20, 2014, 10:51:20 PM
Thanks Tim, Tommy took my initial idea for the covers and ran with it far beyond where I was thinking, the main is a talent.
Glad you enjoyed the chronology :)
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on September 21, 2014, 12:15:15 AM
Neil,

When did AM first show signs of artistic talent and what peeked his interest in golf course design ?
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 21, 2014, 07:48:11 AM
Pat we know that shortly after coming back from the Boer War in 1901 he had written a list of suggestions as to how to improve the course in the suggestion book at Leeds GC. They thought his ideas were weird and disregarded them. As for his artistic side I don't really know if he ever did any drawing before he began to draw golf holes and courses.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 21, 2014, 10:18:44 AM
Good work Neil et al.

I am a little puzzled however, by the following entry;

February 11  1899 Leeds GC, Roundhay, Leeds, England.

Mackenzie plays in the Monthly Medal and finishes in 8th place with a score of 124 (24)=100. This is the
earliest known record of MacKenzie playing golf, although it is likely that
he first played golf in Scotland when there on family holidays.



What basis is there for this conjecture? The family home in Sutherland was fifty miles from the nearest course and there is no suggestion that his father or any other relatives had any interest in the game. Surely the evidence points to MacKenzie's first exposure to golf having been either in Leeds or at Cambridge sometime in the mid to late 1890s?

He clearly hadn't played very much golf by February 1899 if he shot 124 gross off 24! By October 1903 his handicap was down to a very respectable 7.  I've of course known golfers hang around on 18-24 handicaps for years, but they don't normally then go down to single figures.

My inference from this is that he was new to the game in 1899 in his late twenties and got pretty handy over a period of four to five years. Not untypical progress.


When do you think that MacKenzie first visited St Andrews?
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 21, 2014, 05:21:01 PM
Duncan
There are a few entries in the Chronology where there is a bit of conjecture, and clearly written as conjecture. I do not see it as detrimental and as the Chronology editor I'm quite ok with having a few of them.

In this particular case i don't think it is an unreasonable suggestion to think that sometime in his first 29 years, with the number of family visits made back to Scotland from Normanton that he might have played golf at some point. My personal view is that it is more likely as not. Irrespective of whether there were golf courses close to the Mackenzie family home now is not really the point, possibly there were small private courses around that are now NLE. Alister was introduced to Scottish activities such as trout fishing and hunting at an early age and I suspect he may have been introduced to golf too. No evidence (yet), just conjecture, but not unreasonable. Doesn't mean I am suggesting he was a regular player or anything, I just think he may well have played on the odd occasion.

In 'The Spirit of St Andrews' he suggested that he became a member at Leeds "thirty five" years ago, and I recently found information that stated he was writing it as early as 1931, but certainly completed by 1933, so that would push the date of his membership there back to 1896 to 1898. Certainly he was no great shakes as a golfer in 1899 as evidenced by his scoring, but he did improve fairly quickly. Again I am not suggesting that he was a regular player prior to joining Leeds GC, but I think he may have had the occasional game in Scotland when younger.

I'm currently also in touch with the Cambridge University GC to see whether he played while at University, they are gong to be checking their records to see, the early indications are that he was likely not a member and they will see if he is ever recorded in their match books.

As for St Andrews, lets not start another discussion on the DST stuff for now  ;D
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 21, 2014, 05:38:57 PM
Neil,

I think Duncan makes a good point.   The work is too solid to bother with unnecessary conjecture about such things as when he started golfing.  When you get to the point of having to speculate about the possibility that there may have been "small private courses around that are now NLE" in order to make your case, then it seems to me that the case is too weak for what is largely an extremely strong work.


Also, speaking of David Scott-Taylor, I was disappointed to see that Ian Scott-Taylor is still listed as one of the contributors to the work.  Surely this is a mistake, isn't it?  You guys aren't really relying in anything from the supposed David Scott-Taylor materials, are you? 
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 22, 2014, 02:02:17 AM
Neil,

My problem with conjecture such as this in a document otherwise constructed from carefully researched contemporary accounts and verifiable facts is that it could mislead the casual reader into assuming that the conjecture is also fact. It is unnecessary and disingenuous 'spin' applied to a scholarly work.

I agree with David that your explanation is a little weak. There is no record of any NLE golf course anywhere near Lochinver on the excellent 'Golfs Missing Links' website. http://www.golfsmissinglinks.co.uk/index.php/scotland-63/north-west/highlands-a-islands

It would seem to be perpetuating a lazy stereotype to suggest that simply because MacKenzie was of Scottish descent and holidayed occasionally in his father's home town in Sutherland he must have played golf. Not all Scots played golf in the late 19th century - particularly in remote rural areas with no golf course! It is not as if the MacKenzies could have hopped in their car or on a train and had a day out at Dornoch. There were no cars or trains in Lochinver!

What reason could you have for wanting the reader to believe that MacKenzie was playing or had an interest in golf long before 1899?
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 22, 2014, 04:52:26 AM
Wow, I really feel like I'm getting the third degree here.

Sorry if my 'explanation' is a little weak for you two. I can't see the harm in some occasional conjecture in the odd entry, and as I am the editor I am planning to keep it in! None of my fellow research team members noted anything about it when I ran the draft by them.

You two obviously don't think he played golf in Scotland in his youth, whereas I think he may well have. So we disagree.

As for IS-T being listed as a contributor, I had him in the list from the last revision when he provided us with an entry. Obviously since that time this entry was removed in the interest of not courting any controversy, but it was an oversight that left his name in the contributors list. No sinister plot. And why would you think David we are relying on any of the DS-T material for any of the entries? Did you see any entries credited to David Scott-Taylor? No would be the answer there.

As to "What reason could you have for wanting the reader to believe that MacKenzie was playing or had an interest in golf long before 1899?" no real reason other than I thought it might be of interest if he did. There you go.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 22, 2014, 05:37:24 AM
Sorry if you feel under the cosh, Neil.

The work that you do in researching MacKenzie is outstanding, and I am personally very grateful for the information you have sent me over the years regarding Reddish Vale. It has contributed massively to our understanding of the early days of our club and course.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on September 22, 2014, 09:26:08 AM
I must be a gca nerd.  Not sure why I would have spent part of my weekend hanging on every word, wondering what AM did on the third Tuesday of every month, etc.  Good work and fascinating to me.  I also found myself wondering what he really did in the days between entries. 

Obviously, some of that must have been spent drawing the plans that he was reported to have sent out.  Would love some sense of the time frames and mechanics of his actual work on plans.  As far as we know, did he have a draftsman at different times of his career?

I ask because I did a master plan for a 1936 era course in Reno, which the pro swore was a Mac, mostly because the drafting style was the exact same as the Ohio State courses AM plan.  However, this one was designed by Hunter Jr., who was in charge of construction for Mac and his dad, and obviously kept the construction side going as Design Build in the depression to keep working.  Was he the draftsman in the CA stages?  Or did they have someone else.  BTW, even though his dad was retired and sick, Hunter Jr had no trouble telling folks the course was done by a "legendary" designer, no doubt his father.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Bill_McBride on September 22, 2014, 09:58:40 AM
I must be a gca nerd.  Not sure why I would have spent part of my weekend hanging on every word, wondering what AM did on the third Tuesday of every month, etc.  Good work and fascinating to me.  I also found myself wondering what he really did in the days between entries. 

Obviously, some of that must have been spent drawing the plans that he was reported to have sent out.  Would love some sense of the time frames and mechanics of his actual work on plans.  As far as we know, did he have a draftsman at different times of his career?

I ask because I did a master plan for a 1936 era course in Reno, which the pro swore was a Mac, mostly because the drafting style was the exact same as the Ohio State courses AM plan.  However, this one was designed by Hunter Jr., who was in charge of construction for Mac and his dad, and obviously kept the construction side going as Design Build in the depression to keep working.  Was he the draftsman in the CA stages?  Or did they have someone else.  BTW, even though his dad was retired and sick, Hunter Jr had no trouble telling folks the course was done by a "legendary" designer, no doubt his father.

Was that Washoe Golf Course?  I played it a couple of times in 1959 and really liked it.

I thought the craziest thing was the weekly meetings of the Alwoodley committee.  OMG.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Peter Pallotta on September 22, 2014, 10:54:38 AM
Neil (and your team) - first off, I think that's simply outstanding work. The layout and look and organization of the material on the first few pages is very appealing and top-notch, and then the content/chronology that follows is remarkable in its detail. (If the day should come when that chronology/content is 'complete' and the informatiin can be re-formatted into a form similar to your first few pages and include photos etc, you will have one your hands a truly excellent books about a Golden Age architect).

All that said, and being a genuine outsider/neophyte in such matters, I have to agree with David and Duncan on the speculation regarding when Dr Mac first played golf. To put it simply, it strikes me as unnecessary and counterproductive (to the high goals/ideals  of the project). To me it adds nothing of substance to the content/chronology, and indeed inadvertently 'colours' the rest of the content, i.e. as a reader, I find myself thinking "well, if they are guessing here, and guessing for no real purpose, where else might they be guessing, and what 'story' are they trying to create?".

But again, kudos to all for very fine work.

Peter
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 22, 2014, 01:44:21 PM
Neil,

I am not sure why you are getting your hackles up over this.  Your work is terrific and research thorough, but even with the best work some questions and critiques and are bound to arise.  It is part of the process and will make the work better in the long run, provided you consider the comments and critiques in the spirit they were intended.

And why would you think David we are relying on any of the DS-T material for any of the entries?

Because you listed Ian Scott Taylor as a contributor.  I didn't go through every single entry and double check the sourcing. I am glad to hear that listing him as a contributor was an oversight on your part.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Russ Arbuthnot on September 22, 2014, 04:06:23 PM
From The Spirit of St. Andrews, Chapter 6, 4th & 5th paragraph:

"I first commenced to play golf in Scotland when I was about eighteen years of age. At that time I described it as a rotten game, that you simply smote a ball as hard as you could and then spent half an hour looking for it.

I did not take it up again seriously until nearly ten years later, and I then developed the disease badly."

If AM was born in 1870, "about eighteen" would be 1887-1889. And "nearly ten years later", neatly coincides with his 1899 match.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on September 22, 2014, 04:35:37 PM
Perhaps Neil has forgotten this but he chose not to include MY speculation...or is it? ;)

The great golfer Freddie Tait kept a golf diary from the age of 16 where he recorded (presumably all) his matches. The first entries were from July 1886.

On August 30th at St Andrews he played twice agianst Mr Mac'Zie, winning by 4 holes and then 3.

On the 9th September at St Andrews he played a Mr (initial unclear) MacKenzie  and won by 5.
ON the same day they played again when he lost by 2.

ON the 14th he played 3 rounds against the same opponent, wining the first two games by 8 holes and drawing the last.
This time the name of his opponent is clear.  Alister MacKenzie.

Our MacKenzie was 176, the same age as Tait and still at school.  That summer Tait played at St Andrews from 31st July unitl the 17th September. The following year his season was from 4th July to October the 1st.   (Would Tait ahae recorded a juvenile contemporary as 'Mr'?)It is worth adding Tait's successes came from his mid 20's onwards. Low wrote his biography and included quotes from the Golf book, but only after 1896.

I also recall a quote where MacKenzie reminisced about a time when it was common to play 3 rounds in the same day. Can anyone place it?


I will happily send a Jpeg image of this to anyone who agrees to post it on here. Send me an IM with your email address.


PS Outstanding work guys.


Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 22, 2014, 04:48:48 PM
From The Spirit of St. Andrews, Chapter 6, 4th & 5th paragraph:

"I first commenced to play golf in Scotland when I was about eighteen years of age. At that time I described it as a rotten game, that you simply smote a ball as hard as you could and then spent half an hour looking for it.

I did not take it up again seriously until nearly ten years later, and I then developed the disease badly."

If AM was born in 1870, "about eighteen" would be 1887-1889. And "nearly ten years later", neatly coincides with his 1899 match.

Thank you Russ.

I have not read 'The Spirit of St Andrews' but I am sure Neil has.  Why then the conjecture that MacKenzie had played golf in Scotland as a young man rather than simply referencing the above quote?

My issue is with the conjecture, not about when MacKenzie started golfing.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 23, 2014, 04:26:12 PM
Russ
Many thanks for your post and the information from Spirit of St Andrews about Mackenzie playing in Scotland when he was 18. Naturally I am kicking myself for not being aware of it, as I have gone through the book on at least three occasions to pick any timeline entries out of there and completely missed this reference, which is no excuse I know - it was hiding in plain sight!

Duncan
The conjecture it would seem was due to my inability to have noticed that reference in his book. Fairly clear I would have thought that I would have referenced it if I had been aware of it  :) You now mention that your issue with this is about the inclusion of conjecture in our chronology, and not about when he first played golf. Sorry that seems a little disingenuous to me given your arguing in earlier posts about the lack of golf courses within 50 miles of the family home etc.

"The family home in Sutherland was fifty miles from the nearest course and there is no suggestion that his father or any other relatives had any interest in the game. Surely the evidence points to MacKenzie's first exposure to golf having been either in Leeds or at Cambridge sometime in the mid to late 1890s?

He clearly hadn't played very much golf by February 1899 if he shot 124 gross off 24! By October 1903 his handicap was down to a very respectable 7.  I've of course known golfers hang around on 18-24 handicaps for years, but they don't normally then go down to single figures.

My inference from this is that he was new to the game in 1899 in his late twenties and got pretty handy over a period of four to five years. Not untypical progress."


But I do have to thank you Duncan for raising this as that has brought out Russ' contribution due to his eagle eyed reading, which will go in the next revision, whenever that might be.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on September 23, 2014, 04:42:04 PM
Thank you Joe Bausch

This is the first page in Tait's book.
[img
width=800]http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/intro.jpg[/
img] (http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/intro.jpg)

Joe has enlarged the interesting bits.

[img
width=800]http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/line2.jpg[/
img] (http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/line2.jpg)

[img
width=800]http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/intro.jpg[/
img] (http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/intro.jpg)


(http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/lastthreelines.jpg) (http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/lastthreelines.jpg)

You can work out Tait's scores, but were they playing the full course?  I assume so and it tends to suggest his opponent is not a novice just giving it a lash?

Finally a later diary entry featuring MacKenzie's future partner.


(http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/finalone.jpg) (http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Muldoon/finalone.jpg)


Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on September 23, 2014, 05:27:14 PM

In the Spirit of St Andrews he says he got interested in Golf Architecture after returning from serving in hthe South African War 1899 to 1901  Page 19 (Sleeping Bear paperback).  On page 6 he wrote "Before visiting St Andrews I had what were considered revoutionary ideas regarding golf courses."  This does seem clear that this was his first ever visit at some point after 1901 but it was  "some time later that he was employed to make a plan of the course"  Page 7.


I've been looking for that Quote and the nearest I can find is on page 11 where he references 3 gamesa day in foursomes.


So I now call the integrity of this whole timeline into question as there were likely not one but two contemporary Golfers named Alister Mackenzie!

Time to put this theory back on the shelf marked, Possible but unproven.

(Sorry Joe)
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 23, 2014, 06:21:10 PM
Peter P
Appreciate your comments. While I think the occasional conjecture is acceptable I wouldn't want to see too many either. In this case Duncan's highlighting of mine has brought forward this information from Russ who has obviously much advanced reading comprehension skills over mine  ;) which will result in a new timeline entry for the next revision. So it served a purpose at least!

Tony
Thanks for the Tait info, and to Joe for posting the images. I have to say I had forgotten about the Tait matches that you highlighted some time back, apologies  :( I have to wonder though whether it is our Alister Mackenzie. It would appear from the scores of the three matches you highlighted that young Freddie was shooting around the low 90s - a fairly respectable score for those days - while his opponent shot 91 in one match and a few more in the others. Given that we have a score for our AM in 1899 of 124 you have to wonder if these are the same two men. While it would be nice to imagine the two 16 year olds playing matches around St Andrews in 1886 I'd need some more corroborating info to be more certain. But thanks again for bringing it up.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Bill_McBride on September 23, 2014, 07:51:35 PM
Wasn't Freddie Tait the extremely popular young man who was sadly killed in World War I?
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 23, 2014, 08:15:48 PM
Bill, Freddie Tait was killed in the Boer War I understand, so some 15 years earlier than WW1.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Russ Arbuthnot on September 23, 2014, 08:38:41 PM
Neil, I'm glad I could contribute. I honestly was a bit apprehensive about posting. I feared being flamed for posting known but defeated evidence, even if they are A. Mac's own words!

This thread is the first I had heard of this Chronology, and I spent the better part of Friday afternoon working through the early years. It is quite comprehensive, and I echo the comment that if other forms of media could be linked to entries, you'd have a great book, or website [a la the C.B.M. site.] I've really enjoyed it and can't imagine how many hours have gone into it from all the contributors and collaborators.

One other thought I had while reflecting on the chronology was that it would be great if major events could somehow be called out a bit better—almost like a ranking of the weight of certain events. But it's very easy to think of cool features that could be added to a resource like this, and another thing completely to implement and maintain those features. It's quite amazing in its current form!

I also have this thread to thank for my introduction to Freddie Tait. I found a copy of a book written by John L. Low about Tait on Google Books (http://books.google.com/books?id=5x8FAAAAYAAJ&dq=freddie%20tait%20diary&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false).
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 24, 2014, 08:42:28 PM
Neil, I'm glad I could contribute. I honestly was a bit apprehensive about posting. I feared being flamed for posting known but defeated evidence, even if they are A. Mac's own words!

This thread is the first I had heard of this Chronology, and I spent the better part of Friday afternoon working through the early years. It is quite comprehensive, and I echo the comment that if other forms of media could be linked to entries, you'd have a great book, or website [a la the C.B.M. site.] I've really enjoyed it and can't imagine how many hours have gone into it from all the contributors and collaborators.

One other thought I had while reflecting on the chronology was that it would be great if major events could somehow be called out a bit better—almost like a ranking of the weight of certain events. But it's very easy to think of cool features that could be added to a resource like this, and another thing completely to implement and maintain those features. It's quite amazing in its current form!

I also have this thread to thank for my introduction to Freddie Tait. I found a copy of a book written by John L. Low about Tait on Google Books (http://books.google.com/books?id=5x8FAAAAYAAJ&dq=freddie%20tait%20diary&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false).

Russ, certainly not! Your contribution was very welcome. I'm glad you enjoyed looking through the chronology. I'm not quite so multimedia savvy as Mark Bourgeois who has so ably set up the CBM Timeline,  and there no plans to take it beyond a PDF type document. Personally I'd rather spend time on looking for new entries that to making fancy what we already have. That said, I do have plans for a book one day and lots of the research is done for it, I just have to start writing it up - it will be a book on MacKenzie's courses, but from a historical perspective, not modern day coloured photos.

Russ, just wondering if you have the time to undertake an exercise for the chronology project? If you were willing to go through the Spirit of St Andrews in detail and extract all the possible timeline entries against the chronology and see if there are any more we may have missed? No rush of course but it would be quite worthwhile, I believe I saw another possible one the other day when you drew my attention to the text on Scotland. Let me know what you think. Pay is lousy though! But you will get your name in the credits of the next revision!
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Russ Arbuthnot on September 25, 2014, 10:42:04 AM
Neil, I will definitely give it a shot.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 25, 2014, 04:09:14 PM
Duncan
The conjecture it would seem was due to my inability to have noticed that reference in his book. Fairly clear I would have thought that I would have referenced it if I had been aware of it  :) You now mention that your issue with this is about the inclusion of conjecture in our chronology, and not about when he first played golf. Sorry that seems a little disingenuous to me given your arguing in earlier posts about the lack of golf courses within 50 miles of the family home etc.

But I do have to thank you Duncan for raising this as that has brought out Russ' contribution due to his eagle eyed reading, which will go in the next revision, whenever that might be.

Neil,

I've just ordered a copy of 'The Spirit of St Andrews' from Amazon. Clearly I need to read it; apparently so do you!   :)

It would seem that confirmation that AM had played golf as a youth but did not visit St Andrews for the first time until after 1901 has been staring us in the face.

He also references Old Tom Morris at some length but makes no mention of having known him personally...



Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 25, 2014, 04:24:02 PM
Maybe I am misreading the S.G. quote, but seems to me to confirm that MacKenzie did not become seriously interested in the game until his late 20's.  It sounds like his experience with golf at age 18 was quite limited, as he thought it was a "rotten game" and as he did not take it up again seriously until some 10 years later.    S.G.  doesn't mention where he played except that it was somewhere in Scotland, and it doesn't support the notion that he grew up playing in Scotland during family holidays.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 25, 2014, 08:08:32 PM
Russ, that would be great, much appreciated. Always good to have fresh eyes.

Duncan and David, SoSA sadly lacks an index, so it can be difficult to find and re-find things. I seem to find new and interesting things out of the book each time I go into it. Here's one, with Mackenzie talking about his golf game in the chapter "In the Seventies at Sixty", p221.

"I am convinced that the theories I have put down are entirely sound. Yesterday, after writing them, I went out to play golf with them firmly planted in my mind. Time after time I outdrove, much to their astonishment, two young fellows who in the past had left me far behind. Notwithstanding a broken bone in my wrist, and in consequence a wasted left arm, I was driving with deadly accuracy and frequency well over two hundred and thirty yards, and my approach play was equally good, despite the fact I was only playing with four clubs."

Now that information about MacKenzie's wrist and his "wasted left arm" was not something that had registered on me previously, and I don't recall it having been brought to light by anyone previously in books or any discussion about Mackenzie. But its not a timeline entry, he wrote the book from around 1931-33, and we don't know when he suffered the wrist injury, recent or old. An interesting fact nevertheless.

So I'm glad Duncan that you have ordered a copy, you'll enjoy it.

I have to take issue Duncan with your statement "after 1901" as Mackenzie does not specifically say "after 1901" in his book.Tony Muldoon also assumed this after 1901 date in his post too. The 'after' part seems to have been added by you and Tony. On page 19 he wrote:

"My own interest in golf course architecture originated in an unusual way. During the years of 1899 to 1901 I was serving in the South African war" he then goes on to talk about the Boers and their natural fortifications, and that "on my return from South Africa I wrote two or three pages in the suggestion book of the Leeds Golf Club" to point out how the course could be changed.

Mackenzie in fact returned from South Africa early in 1901, in early April. By June he was recorded as playing in a medal competition at Leeds GC. So he got back into golf quite quickly it would seem upon his return. My thinking then is that he wrote in the Leeds GC his thoughts on the course in 1901 not so long after returning, especially as it seems he had these ideas generated by what he saw in South Africa going around his head. He says he wrote them "on returning" and not a few years after returning.

I know why you are saying "after 1901" David and Duncan as it suits your hypothesis, but Mackenzie did not say "after 1901" and the known facts support that he was back in Leeds relatively early in 1901, was playing golf again at Leeds GC and was beginning to formulate his ideas on golf courses using the Boer fortifications as his inspiration.

David, Mackenzie wrote that he "first commenced to play golf in Scotland when I was about eighteen years of age", and by the sound of it he may have had more than just one game. You say that this doesn't support the notion that "he grew up playing in Scotland during family holidays" But I never said that David, the speculative entry in the chronology in fact says "it is likely that he first played golf in Scotland when there on family holidays." Which in fact has been proven correct. I did not say that he 'grew up' playing golf in Scotland, rather I said he first played, as these would seem to be two different things, growing up playing golf would seem to imply that it was a much more regular activity which I never suggested.

And if MacKenzie was playing golf in Scotland when he was around 17, 18, 19 years of age, do you imagine he was in Scotland for any other purpose than family holidays? In those years he was finishing his schooling at Wakefield and being admitted into Cambridge.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 26, 2014, 12:15:25 AM
Neil,  you wrote:  "I know why you are saying "after 1901" David and Duncan as it suits your hypothesis, but Mackenzie did not say 'after 1901' . . .."

My hypothesis?  I have no hypothesis relating to or relying on the date MacKenzie started golfing, and I have never claimed he started "after 1901."   My thought (based on past readings Scotland's Gift, probably) was that he developed a serious interest in golf sometime after returning from the Boer War, and the quote Russ brought up seems to confirm that.  But it is neither here nor there to me, and I have never taken a hard position that he began "after 1901" as you claim I have.

My concern was (and is) with whether or not the entries in the outline are backed up by fact, or based on conjecture.   In my opinion it is much better and more useful work if the claims are "proven correct" before they are included in the factual outline, not at some later point.  I'm not the only one who feels this way.   The outline is better than that, and no purpose is served by conjecturing about trivial matters such as  "family holidays" without factual support.

When you refer to my "hypothesis," do you mean my strong suspicion that the Scott-Taylor material is not at all what Phil and Ian Scott-Taylor have claimed it to be?  I suppose one could attack that material by focusing on the date actually MacKenzie became a "golf designer," but there are much larger and more insurmountable problems with the material than that.

You aren't still waving the banner for those guys, are you?  If so, could this be why you seem to be trying to jam the date Mac made his Leeds Golf Club suggestions as far back into 1901 as you can?

"Mackenzie in fact returned from South Africa early in 1901, in early April. By June he was recorded as playing in a medal competition at Leeds GC. So he got back into golf quite quickly it would seem upon his return. My thinking then is that he wrote in the Leeds GC his thoughts on the course in 1901 not so long after returning, especially as it seems he had these ideas generated by what he saw in South Africa going around his head. He says he wrote them "on returning" and not a few years after returning."

Interesting conjecture, but by no means the only hypothesis supported by the record thus far.  Surely you aren't thinking of dating the Leeds suggestions based on this conjecture are you?  


Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Duncan Cheslett on September 26, 2014, 01:16:38 AM
You aren't still waving the banner for those guys, are you?  If so, could this be why you seem to be trying to jam the date Mac made his Leeds Golf Club suggestions as far back into 1901 as you can?

You might think that, David.


I couldn't possibly comment...
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 26, 2014, 01:53:02 AM
David, I am no more trying to jam his comments on the Leeds Golf Club as far back into 1901, than you and Duncan are trying to make them "after 1901"  ;)

I am going on Mackenzie's choice of words which were "on my return", which in normal English comprehension means pretty much straightaway. As he doesn't give us an exact date for this we can only interpret his choice of words.

I have not raised the Scott-Taylor material in relation to the timeline and if I recall it is you who has raised this a number of times now. 

The simple fact is that I included some supposition in the Chronology, which has subsequently been proven to be correct. This is not connected to the Scott-Taylor material despite you trying your best to link it. Im not going to debate your concerns about the veracity of that material here.

Duncan, "you couldn't possibly comment"? That hasn't stopped you before!
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 26, 2014, 02:22:19 AM
Neil, You again quote me as saying "after 1901."  Care to tell me where I ever said that?  And if I didn't, will you please stop putting words in my mouth?  Thanks.

Also Neil, you are the one who is linking in the Scott-Taylor nonsense.   Or if not, then what exactly did you mean by my supposed "hypothesis" which you mistakenly believe is driving my position?

You wrote:
"I am going on Mackenzie's choice of words which were "on my return", which in normal English comprehension means pretty much straightaway. As he doesn't give us an exact date for this we can only interpret his choice of words."

Well, I am not so sure that "on my return" written over three decades later is quite as equivocal as you suggest, and I am not so sure why would you insist it is so.   And I don't agree that "we can only interpret his choice of words."  In the alternative we could acknowledge that we don't know the date, and hold off on conjecture until we get more solid information as to when he made his suggestions.  
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Neil_Crafter on September 26, 2014, 02:58:10 AM
David, both you and Duncan have brought up the Scott-Taylor material repeatedly. It was not mentioned by me until you started harping on it. I have seen a lot more of this material than you have made your judgements upon and I am not so ready to dismiss it as 'nonsense' as you seem to be. That's it for me.
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: DMoriarty on September 26, 2014, 03:35:43 AM
Actually Neil, it wasn't me who brought up the Scott-Taylor material, and I have hardly been harping on it.  After you mentioned it, I did ask you why Ian Scott-Taylor was listed as a contributor, and you acknowledged that was an error on your part, while at the same time coming after me for even asking.

The next time it came up from me was after you accused me of pushing a "post 1901" date to support my supposed hypothesis, by which you were referring to my views on the Scott-Taylor material.  Of course I never said anything about 1901.  

I don't blame you for not wanting to discuss the whole fiasco, as it seems to have you quite on edge.  And understandably so.  But if you really don't want to get into it here, then perhaps you should refrain from the bluster about how much you've seen, and how much I haven't.  

Or, if you'd like to discuss it, I do have some questions.  
Title: Re: The MacKenzie Chronology 18th Revision Released
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on September 26, 2014, 03:04:27 PM
Neil, I will definitely give it a shot.

Russ have fun.

In my attempt to pin his time in St Andrews down I looked for information on the starter Grieg referred to on page 11.

http://www.golfing-tees.com/family-golfing/andrew-lamb-greig-golf-starter-at-the-old-course-in-st-andrews-1894-1915/

No help at all. ;)