[Joe Bausch]

GDub,

That photo is a great find.  Perhaps your eyes are better than mine, but I can't see the #4 green being in a much different position in that photo than it is now.  But that 1930's photo that Mark showed us today sure suggests it is on the 'other side' of the creek with the tee likely up on the hill.  Mike, help us out here!

And Kyle and I have been chatting about this all evening.  If the #4 green was just east of the current location (so sort of an island green), that make sense for #5 being a par 5 as Mark suggested as I think he said he heard (or had an old scorecard) it was 480 yards.  The current #5 tee from the tips is just a bit over 400 yards, I think about 420.  So for #5 to be approaching 500 yards suggests another long lost tee is up on the hill maybe 40 yards due south of the current 17th green.  Gosh, #5 would have been an interesting par 5.  I assume you would hit a tee shot just past or around the current #4 green, then play your 2nd shot left or right of the creek, then a short shot in.  Maybe I have this all messed up.  If so, I'll delete this post later.  

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

Two NLEs on that aerial. One NW of McCall and one in the upper right along City Ave.

The one on City Line was the old Overbrook Golf Club.  The current hospital moved there in 1953.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lankenau_hospital

The other one was The Pennsylvania Railroad Golf Club:

"The Pennsylvania Railroad Golf Club was established in 1925 on 109 acres bounded by Earlington Road, Manoa Road and City Line. This property was sold in 1943 to Warner West Corporation, which developed Chatham Park."

http://www.haverfordtownship.com/history

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

GDub,

That photo is a great find.  Perhaps your eyes are better than mine, but I can't see the #4 green being in a much different position in that photo than it is now.  But that 1930's photo that Mark showed us today sure suggests it is on the 'other side' of the creek with the tee likely up on the hill.  Mike, help us out here!

And Kyle and I have been chatting about this all evening.  If the #4 green was just east of the current location (so sort of an island green), that make sense for #5 being a par 5 as Mark suggested as I think he said he heard (or had an old scorecard) it was 480 yards.  The current #5 tee from the tips is just a bit over 400 yards, I think about 420.  So for #5 to be approaching 500 yards suggests another long lost tee is up on the hill maybe 40 yards due south of the current 17th green.  Gosh, #5 would have been an interesting par 5.  I assume you would hit a tee shot just past or around the current #4 green, then play your 2nd shot left or right of the creek, then a short shot in.  Maybe I have this all messed up.  If so, I'll delete this post later.  

Joe,

Thanks for all of your hard work and research which teed us up for our visit today.

#4 green looks to me like it is on that natural island.  The shading around the edges and what looks to be two bridges both seem to support our theory (I had to zoom in and then back up a little from my sceen before it came into focus).  In fact the second bridge seems to lead up towards the 17th green which futher supports #5 being a longer hole.

#5 from a tee up that hill would be a stunning hole.  I walked up there today and the creek becomes much more visible.  That would be a hole which requires a gameplan... it wouldn't be obvious how to play it the first time through.

Look at the size of the front bunker on the current #16 (5-10x a regular bunker on the course!).  If that bunker was flashed up it would be a great hazard.

Look at how they cleared out the woods on #17 leading up to that tee (which appears to be visible, just follow the triangle to its point).

[Mike_Cirba]

Guys,

This is some fabulous stuff!  

I need to study the 4th and 12th greens a bit more...I'm not sure it's clear, and I probably need a higher resolution monitor.

In any case, one thing today that I thought was tremendous was the realization that;

Guys like Tom Paul and Sean Arble are always talking about the overuse of bunkering on courses and the idea of creating courses where "gravity golf" is the predominant theme.

Man..as Wayne pointed out, CC has Gravity Golf in spades, all over the place.

I dare to say that you could remove every existing bunker except the one fronting today's #10 and not significantly change the golf course.   I'd never suggest such a thing, if only for aesthetic preference, but Cobbs is truly a lay of the land course without need for much in the way of man-made artifice.

[Mike_Cirba]

I'd also point out that Joe's routing pic is pretty close, but today we learned of some other tee locations that make it even cooler.

[Joe Bausch]

I'm now looking at an aerial MikeC provided (the one numbered 12585 in the bottom right corner) and together w/ the link Geoff provided, I'm really wondering about an alternative for the way holes #4 and 5 ran.  In your aerial Mike it seems there could be a corridor for the 4th hole to run where the tee box would be almost due south, and little west, from where we think the green was at one time.  Then I wonder if the 5th tee was near the creek west of 4 green, perhaps even over the creek, and this hole then plays at a much different angle currently.  

Mark, your thoughts?

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm now looking at an aerial MikeC provided (the one numbered 12585 in the bottom right corner) and together w/ the link Geoff provided, I'm really wondering about an alternative for the way holes #4 and 5 ran.  In your aerial Mike it seems there could be a corridor for the 4th hole to run where the tee box would be almost due south, and little west, from where we think the green was at one time.  Then I wonder if the 5th tee was near the creek west of 4 green, perhaps even over the creek, and this hole then plays at a much different angle currently.  

Mark, your thoughts?

Joe,

You may very well be onto something there, and I suggest the only way we can find out is to get the blow up of that aerial from the Hagley if Mark doesn't have that one already.

Personally, I've never felt comfortable with the existing angle of the 5th from the tee and given what we learned about the 4th yesterday, I think we should look around more at where the tee might have been.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

One thing I'm noting on Geoffrey's aerial consistent with your theory is that the "walking path" leading from the 3rd green runs behind that green and on the complete opposite side of the creek than it currently runs, and then continues up along the southwest sides of 4 & 5 (before crossing over on the 5th fairway), again, completely opposite of today.

Your theory would also seemingly place the 4th tee much closer to the 3rd green than is currently the case, which makes sense given the discovered original greensite of the 4th.  

[Joe Bausch]

That walking path is what got me thinking of this.

[Mike_Cirba]

That walking path is what got me thinking of this.

Joe,

Take a look at 05598, as well.

[Joe Bausch]

That walking path is what got me thinking of this.

Joe,

Take a look at 05598, as well.

I think we are on to something here Mike!

[Mike_Cirba]

I think we are on to something here Mike!

Bingo!   Paging Mark Susko.  

We have another reconnaissance mission for you.  

[wsmorrison]

[Mike_Cirba]

Thanks, Wayne...

Now, where's Google Earth when we need it showing how far back the tee would have to be on the south side of the creek to make 5 into a 495 yard par five?  

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

Nice work, boys!  I didn't even focus on that walking path, but I agree that it might be the key to figuring out the puzzle of the 4th and the 5th.

[Joe Bausch]

Mike, my estimates (using the length of #17 in the old days of 210 yards) suggests the tee for the 5th would be due west of the original #4 green location.  On your one photo named "70.200.12535", if you see what looks like something very white in photo west of 4 green, that is maybe 450 yards from the green.  So just go a little farther back in the shute, and BAM (!), there it would be.

Emeril
--------------

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

I think the other thing that Geoffrey's pic clearly points out is that the left side of #5 fairway was always in play, and that my aerial we looked at yesterday was shadowy in that stretch, which can also be seen in Geoffrey's "winter"  photo.

It's more reason we need to get a clear blow-up of 12535.

In looking at Google Maps, and considering that area today, coming from the 3rd green and heading left of where the path leads today, it looks to be a path of discovery.

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

At least that area is in Delaware County so tree clearing shouldn't be an issue!  

[Joe Bausch]

At least that area is in Delaware County so tree clearing shouldn't be an issue!  

I'll meet you there w/ chainsaw in hand after the Iggles game.  

If our detective work on 4 and 5 is correct, why did these holes change?  I'm going to assume flooding issues.

[David Stamm]

I just want to say that I find the enthusiasm from everyone on this thread very exciting. Keep it up guys! I'm rooting for ya!

[Willie_Dow]

Wayne

We'll have to work on those coffer dams on Cobbs Creek as it meanders through the Merion East Course, to stop the flooding down stream.

Great work, guys !

[wsmorrison]

I've already ordered a camouflage outfit for you, Bill, complete with black watch cap.  You may have been a Navy officer, but that grizzled Marine, Tom Paul, is going to sneak us in and the township will never know we're deep under cover until we blow up the dams.  Rent the movie Bridge On The River Kwai and get ready for action!

[Willie_Dow]

Sorry Wayne, but I'll have to make this a little clearer.  

We don't want to remove the dams up stream, we need catch basins and coffer dams to slow the water down as it approaches the 11th green.  This would also help control the flow down to Cobbs.

At one time we thought about a diversion into the quarry in front of #17 tee.

Much of this run-off starts up at Villanova, from the parking lot.  So we might have to get Joe involved.

[Marty Bonnar]

Here is a pic that shows how old #9 at Cobb's might look like (if only Photoshop had a 'tree removal' button!), which is from current tee #14 to the 7th green:



My rangefinder suggests it would be about 360 yards long, maybe 390 from the back tees.

Joe, Joe, Joe,
you forget THIS is GCA. We have ways of making things happen.



Personally, I'd make the bunker a bit more frilly-edged, but hey, I'm still waiting for the 'MacKenzie-ise' button for Photoshop...

FBD.

[Joe Bausch]

FBD:  that is outstanding.  I'm fairly computer literate but not so much /w Photoshop.  Please share in an IM!

Note, the only part you are missing are some grass bunkers about 50-75 yards short of the green, as depicted here:

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()