[TEPaul]

"TE
We all make mistakes....of course not all of us have a deranged fact checker with a vendetta following us around 24 X 7. By the way I'm not really interested in who did what at PV, my focus is on the psychology of the Philadelphian."

Tom:

Well, that's fine of you to admit that we all make mistakes---we sure do! As far as having a deranged fact checker following us around 24/7---well I guess all I can say on that is welcome to GOLFCLUBALTAS.com, the purist architecture site that pretty much forces those on it to take responsibility for the things they say and conclude on here or be subjected to a textual brawl on here that could rival the best Friday night barroom brawls in Dodge City!

As far as no longer being interested in who did what at PV, I can't say I blame you on that! So now you're more interested in the pyschology of the Philadelphian, are you? That might be an interesting subject! Are you going to write about that from the Ohio Ivory Tower surrounded by all your informative old newspaper and magazine articles and perhaps some old photos or are you going to venture out in the big bad world and actually come to Philadelphia for the first time in your life and see it up close and personal and perhaps even meet one of those odd Philadelphians who may even be in on a George Crump glorification campaign and a Crump death conspiracy? Maybe you could even come out to the country and see Aronimink's restoration and talk to a member about how they like it. Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot, you've implied you don't really care about things like that.  

[T_MacWood]

Phillip
I don't believe the Huntercombe history takes Park's personal history that far, at least the one I have read. I believe the authors name is Adams.

Adams also wrote 'The Parks of Musselburgh', which is very good and goes into greater detail on his life.

Willie was a very interesting man and a real pioneer in golf architecture.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom MacWood,

I have to agree with you, again. Willie Park is arguably "the pioneer" in golf course architecture. It seems his original works at Sunningdale and Huntercombe really set the stage for everything to follow.

[TEPaul]

"It seems his original works at Sunningdale and Huntercombe really set the stage for everything to follow."

It sure does! Cornish and Whitten treat this subject pretty darn well, I think, in the beginning of their book---and that seems to be the conclusion they reach. If they aren't right about that who could one point to who created a really quality golf course away from the linkland first or before Park's Sunningdale and Huntercombe? Old Tom Morris? Not even close!

[ForkaB]

"It seems his original works at Sunningdale and Huntercombe really set the stage for everything to follow."

It sure does! Cornish and Whitten treat this subject pretty darn well, I think, in the beginning of their book---and that seems to be the conclusion they reach. If they aren't right about that who could one point to who created a really quality golf course away from the linkland first or before Park's Sunningdale and Huntercombe? Old Tom Morris? Not even close!

Well, Tom, you are wrong again

....Prior to WPJr.'s work at Sunningdale and Huntercombe, OTM had produced the following quality inland golf courses:

--Alyth
--Dunblane
--Ladybank
--Lanark
--Royal Burgess
--Stirling

Have a nice day!

[Jeff_Mingay]

Rich,

I think Park's pioneering work in the heathlands is much more sophisticated than Old Tom's early inland course designs.

No?  

[ForkaB]

Jeff

Don't know, as I've not played any of WPJr's heathland courses.  I did belong to a pre-1900 WPJr course (Burntisland)for a couple of years )so I know what he can do), and I have played a sampling of the heathland courses (so I know how good they can be), and......

.....I stil think that the courses I listed above are "quality" courses, even through the WPJr/Heathland prism.  In fact, if Ladybank were located in Surrey and had a few Royals as members, we'd be singing its praises, rather than dissing it, as we tend to do now.  IMO, of course......

Cheers

[T_MacWood]

Rich
I don't know too much about those courses, but it is always difficult to evaluate Old Tom because most of his courses were altered at some point...sometimes significantly.

TE
Park's contribution was acknowledged long before Cornish and Whitten. Certainly at the time, those courses were recognized as being revolutionary, but from a historic point of view it goes back (at least) to Guy Campbell's chapter in the 'History of Golf in Britain'...around 1950.

[ForkaB]

Tom

So were Willie's.........

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Those courses you mentioned really got some early attention in architecture like Sunningdale and Huntercombe did, didn't they? Dream on blindly pal!

[TEPaul]

"TE
Park's contribution was acknowledged long before Cornish and Whitten. Certainly at the time, those courses were recognized as being revolutionary, but from a historic point of view it goes back (at least) to Guy Campbell's chapter in the 'History of Golf in Britain'...around 1950."

Tom MacWood:

Why is it that you always seem to read something into things that just isn't there? I didn't say Cormish and Whitten were the first to point out the significance of Willie Park Jr, I merely said I think they treated out his significance very well in their book!

[ForkaB]

Tom

You are dreaming, old buddy, and since, as the Chinese say:

"Man with eyes always closed will never wake up"

you will probably never get it, alas........

[T_MacWood]

Rich
Some were, some weren't...no one was immune to redesign.

The difference, Willie Park II created  inland designs that emulated the natural qualities of links golf, and he spent time and great effort developing these courses...as opposed to the fomulaic cop designs, usually on a flattish field somewhere and normally laid out in a single afternoon.

There is a good reason Old Tom got no respect as a course maker from the likes of Garden Smith, Horace Hutchinson, Bernard Darwin, etc....even though they loved him personally.

[ForkaB]

Tom

To me, Ladybank and Alyth and Stirling (and, I'm told, Lanark) "emulate the natural qualities of links golf" too.  You can't really choose between Ladybank and Swinley Forest in terms of architectural quality, IMO.  Could it not possibly be that courses built in and around London for the toffs by Teuchters like WPII got much more attention from people like Darwin than workingman's courses in the hinterlands of Scotland built before those guys were hardly born?

Just wondering.....

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Obviously, one can tell sometimes I don't agree at all with some of the things Tom MacWood says but I sure do in his post above about Old Tom Morris's place in developing a breakthrough in architecture outside the linksland---eg in comparison to Park's significance that way. And I completely agree with Tom MacW in his point of the comparision of "time in" if you even know what that means.

If you really did know the essence of this stuff you'd probably understand why there's no comparison simply in the fact of how little time in Morris devoted to the course's attributed to him compared to Park at architectural break-through courses like Park's Sunningdale and Huntercombe.

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Your point about Morris's courses or that Morris may not have gotten attention or respect from some of the best architectural analysts and writers on architecture of the day is also seemingly ludicrous and I totally agree with Tom MacWood on his common-sense assumption on that. Old Tom Morris was most certainly not someone who wasn't noticeable to any of them---in that he probably was the most famous man in all of golf in a sense back then. If he'd actually done some really good breakthrough architecture outside of the linksland I hardly think it would've escaped notice---even if the course was some "working man's" course as you said. Good architecture is good architecture and I doubt there was so much volume going on back then that something good would've escaped the notice of those comprehensive early golf and architecture writers.

[ForkaB]

Exactly how much time did OTM devote to Ladybank ,Tom?  How much did WPJr. spend at Huntercombe?  Which course is better (since I assume you've neither played nor seen either of these courses, you are going to have to use MacWood's techniques of comparison here.... ).

Thanking you in advance.

[T_MacWood]

Rich
Old Tom's Ladybank consisted of six holes straight out, which were then played in reverse to get home.

The major golf magazines of the day were based up in Scotland, Garden Smith was a Scotsman. Darwin and all were familiar with Old Tom, they had seen is act in the south as well.

[ForkaB]

Since I have gotten Tom I and Tom II to agree, I feel that this day was a successful one for me.

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Me seeing and playing these courses is not the point at all, although it doesn't surprise me that you're misguided enough to think so. This isn't about my analyses of what those courses and the significance of their architects are 100 and some years later this is about what those who lived and played golf in that region and anaylzed and wrote comprehensively about architecture in those days and contemporaneous to when they were built and when their architects lived and the significance of what they did.

This isn't about what my opinions of the significance of those courses and their architects is---as Tom MacWood just said, this is about the historic record of what the likes of Hutchinson, Campbell, Smith, Darwin et al felt about the significance of those courses and the significance of thier archtiects.

[ForkaB]

Tom

I'll keep that comment about "Me seeing and playing these courses is not the point at all" next time you try to rake Tom MacW over the coals for commenting on courses he has not played or even seen.

BTW--don't take what the old dead guys said in the blush of their (and golf's) nyouth as gospel.  If history were only written by contemporaries, it would really all be bunk.......

[TEPaul]

"Tom
I'll keep that comment about "Me seeing and playing these courses is not the point at all" next time you try to rake Tom MacW over the coals for commenting on courses he has not played or even seen."

Rich:

You really don't understand much do you? Is it possible for you to get anything remotely right? When I mentioned Tom MacWood needing to play or at least see a course before intelligently commenting on it we were talking about a restoration project that was done in the last two years not what contemporary critics thought of Park Jr vs Tom Morris's architecture over 110-120 years ago!

God, you're dense!

[TEPaul]

"BTW--don't take what the old dead guys said in the blush of their (and golf's) nyouth as gospel.  If history were only written by contemporaries, it would really all be bunk....... "

Jeeesus, what a statement! They may not have gotten everything chronicled accurately contemporaneously but they sure as hell did about a thousand times better job of it than someone like you is capable of doing now!

As Tom MacWood said, you may be looking at some of those courses attributed to Morris today but how do you know what you're looking at is Morris? Have you done a comprehensive design evolution study of all those courses you listed? Don't bother to even answer that----you wouldn't even know how, particularly since you think everything written contemporaneously has to be bunk!

God are you dense!

[ForkaB]

Tom I

How do you know if you are looking at Park (assuming you have ever played a Park course, or even not, if you continue to follow the MacWood school of non-experiential analysis.... ).  How do you know if you've played a Crump?  Do you dare to eat a peach?

[Kyle Harris]

Rich,

Going to have to give mad credit to you for the TS Eliot allusion...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()