[TEPaul]

Mike:

Not really other than the fact that I have no idea why he would come up with what he called that 'alternative.' He did preface it with the admission that he has never been to Myopia so my only assumption is he must think there is some mystery to the architectural evolution of the courses of Myopia. I don't think there is much of any mystery to it at all and the facts of it are pretty much in the archives of the club although perhaps the accounts of it in the newspapers may skew that for reasons that are also understandable---in my opinion.

But David Moriarty did say that he would explain his reasons for that alterantive evolution---so why don't we just wait for his explanation and then comment on it?

[Tom MacWood]

I also recall one blurb indicating that the course was changed for the 1895 golfing season.  If so, is it possible that changes these changes created the "long nine" before Leeds even joined the club?

There was a report in the Boston Daily Advertiser November 15, 1895:

"New links have been laid out this season which are pronounced the finest in the country by experts. They cover three miles and there are nine holes."

Three miles would make for a Very Long Nine...maybe they were calculating based on 18 holes. By the way CBM held the course record of 46.

TEP
I'm familiar with fox hunting, you chase the fox over the entire countryside, and you go where ever he takes you, but isn't that a little different then building permanent greens, tees and bunkers on someone else's land. And under your scenario they obviously realized at some point that it was a mistake and moved the holes on to their own land. Is that correct? What year did they move those three holes? Is that a difficult question.

[TEPaul]

“There was a report in the Boston Daily Advertiser November 15, 1895:

"New links have been laid out this season which are pronounced the finest in the country by experts. They cover three miles and there are nine holes."”

Three miles would make for a Very Long Nine...maybe they were calculating based on 18 holes. By the way CBM held the course record of 46.”



Tom MacWood:

Yes, a three mile nine would be VERY long indeed!!   It would be very long indeed for 1895 or even 2010, come to think of it. But maybe that Boston Daily Advertiser Nov. 15, 1895 report did mean 18 holes; except Myopia Hunt Club did not have 18 holes in 1895----or are you now trying to suggest it did and Weeks and Myopia’s history got that wrong too?   It seems your “independent” newspaper research sources are just about as historically accurate, reliable and credible as you are. But thanks for the effort anyway. By the way, a three mile nine would be 5,200+ yards and if they meant two of those it would be a 10,000+ yard 18 hole golf course. So who do you think was into that kind of difficulty---Herbert Leeds or Willie Campbell?  




“TEP
I'm familiar with fox hunting, you chase the fox over the entire countryside, and you go where ever he takes you,……”



Is that actually the extent of your familiarity with fox hunting? Ouch! It appears you may know less about fox hunting than you do about the history of golf architecture, golf and 19th century golf clubs, but not much less.



“…….but isn't that a little different then building permanent greens, tees and bunkers on someone else's land.”


You’re asking me if building permanent greens, tees and bunkers on someone else’s land is a little different than chasing a fox over the entire countryside?? I’m not sure I understand your question but if I were to give it a guess I would say, Ah, Gee, well Yeah, I guess you could say that and the remarkably thing is apparently you just did say that!!  



“And under your scenario they obviously realized at some point that it was a mistake and moved the holes on to their own land. Is that correct?”




I’m not sure why you say it was a mistake; Myopia’s records did not mention it was a mistake, but yes, when Leeds developed the Long Nine from the original 1894 nine he did move three holes to what they referred to as the “ridge”----eg where #14, #15 and #16 are today and where #7, #8 and #9 were on the Long Nine.

 

“What year did they move those three holes? Is that a difficult question.”


No, it’s not really a difficult question, but I do not have Myopia’s records in front of me----they’re in South Hamilton, Mass, and I’m in Philadelphia right now, but from memory and Weeks’ history book I would say they decided to move them in 1895 and they did the work and opened them in 1896.

As for when they purchased Dr. S.A. Hopkins’ land, again, I don’t have Myopia’s records in front of me but one source indicates that at Leeds’ insistence they purchased Dr. S.A. Hopkins’ 51 acres in 1897 for $3,500.  

[TEPaul]

Oh, and by the by, as far as CBM shooting a 46 and holding the course record, so what? CBM was an excellent player in those days. So good in fact that he actually won the USGA's first US Amateur Championship! Are you aware of that, Tom MacWood, and do you happen to think it's as relevent to this subject and its discussion as chasing a fox all over the entire countryside?? 

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

More and more here I think the irony is that Willie Campbell was apparently brought over to "lay out the course on the ground" to someone else's plan, most likely as the hired help.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Weeks says they began developing new holes on the ridge the first year (1894), which is consistent with that report in 1895. This is at least a year before Leeds became a member. At that time a new golf course and/or new golf holes were laid out ready for play within weeks. And it is inaccurate to call the Long Nine a completely new nine since apparently only three holes were changed.

They purchased the Hopkins land in 1897 for the purpose of expanding the course to eighteen holes, it was at this point Leeds became involved.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

More and more here I think the irony is that Willie Campbell was apparently brought over to "lay out the course on the ground" to someone else's plan, most likely as the hired help.

I don't follow you. Explain to us the way you see it...who was involved and how it transpired.

[Niall C]

Tom,

More and more here I think the irony is that Willie Campbell was apparently brought over to "lay out the course on the ground" to someone else's plan, most likely as the hired help.

Mike

As a matter of interest, what do you think was involved in designing/laying out a course in 1894 ? How permanent would it have been and how often would it have been re-aligned or totally altered. It strikes me that there could well be a course already laid out before Willie did his thing and totally redesigned the layout, which might not have been that big a deal.

Niall

[TEPaul]

"This is at least a year before Leeds became a member. At that time a new golf course and/or new golf holes were laid out ready for play within weeks. And it is inaccurate to call the Long Nine a completely new nine since apparently only three holes were changed.

They purchased the Hopkins land in 1897 for the purpose of expanding the course to eighteen holes, it was at this point Leeds became involved."



Tom MacWood:

There you go again---just making things up again! I never said the Long Nine was a completely new nine. Matter of fact, just a day or so ago I first informed you (after you continuously ignored my question to you to describe the holes of the original 1894 nine) and this website that only three holes were entirely different and in an entirely different place from the original 1894 nine that were originally staked out by Appleton, Merrill and Gardner in the early spring of 1894.

Herbert Leeds was responsible for the development of the Long Nine. From Weeks' history book:

"Soon after he joined the club, Leeds was appointed to the golf committee. By now the preparation of the uphill holes was begun, and Leeds was asked to lay out the Long Nine, he did so with the determination to make Myopia Links as testing as the lay of the land permitted and never to settle for a level putting surface when undulations or a slope were available."

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
According to Weeks they began developing the holes along the ridge in 1894/95. According to you those three holes were the holes changed from the original nine. No you are telling us the course was redesigned after Leeds became a member. Those differing stories do not reconcile. Do you have any evidence/contemporaneous info to support your theory?

[Mike Cirba]

Why did Leeds need to be a member to have designed the Long Nine?

He was already the best player in Boston, he'd designed Kebo Valley, he won the opening day tourney at Myopia...

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

As usual with other subjects and threads on here you seem to get so confused about what someone actually says on here. What you are confused about is what I said on here and only in the last few days. Go back and reread that post I wrote that explains the differences between the 1894 nine and the Long Nine. That is what Weeks wrote and that is what the club records of the time which he was obviously actually looking at when he wrote his book say and confirm. If you can't understand it I suggest you try to do what I've done and just go to the club and read their records instead of relying on just old newspaper accounts which are inherently indirect and probably just mistaken in various ways.

I've told you for years that if anyone, including you, ever really wants to understand the details of the architectural history of any golf course they  just have to go to that subject itself, get to know it and read its historical records. You just continue to ignore this and your confusion with Merion and others and now Myopia is one good reason for it.

I just don't have the time or the interest or the patience to try to constantly educate someone who seems to be as slow on the uptake and the understanding of the details of this subject as you apparently are. There is no mystery to the architectural evolution of Myopia, just as there basicallly isn't with Merion and a few others you claim there is. However, you just never cease in trying to make it look like there is!  

[TEPaul]

"Why did Leeds need to be a member to have designed the Long Nine?"


Apparently the only reason is because Tom MacWood seems to think that has to be necessary for some odd reason. But as you say Leeds was certainly never unknown to Myopia before he joined the club from Brookline. He also apparently has no idea what Boston was like then (and actually still is) in that all those people pretty much know one another anyway no matter which of those prominent old golf clubs they belong to. I suppose he's just trying to bring up all these irrelevent points and questions because ultimately he is trying to make it look like Willie Campbell actually had more to do with the development of Myopia's course than he ever did have. He is trying to do with Campbell and Myopia about the same thing he tried to do with HH Barker and Merion East. This kind of thing is pretty much what Tom MacWood always tries to do on this website; haven't you noticed that yet?   

[Mike Cirba]

To date, all we've known or been told here is that Merrill, Gardner, and Appleton were incompetent members unfamiliar with golf, and derided as the "Master of the Hounds", to accentuate the point.

What we've since learned by the articles I posted yesterday is much different.   Willie Campbell did indeed arrive in Boston by March 31st, 1894, but seems to have been housed at the Country Club in Brookline, quite a day's travel in those days from Myopia.   Further, very early on (by April 15th) we see that someone got Campbell a season's assignment not at Myopia right away, but instead at Essex County, where he stayed through Sept 1894, before heading  back to Brookline for a month, and then to Pau in France for the winter that year.

In the meantime, by that same April 15th date it was reported that a subcommittee had already been formed at Myopia with two of the men credited in the Myopia internal archives and mentioned in Weeks' book for staking out the original course.   

By May 13th we know that the location of the holes had already been determined, as the articles mentioned one could see the whole course from the high vantage point (of the original first tee, today's second), so we know the course was designed sometime between April 15th and then, and we also know it opened officially with a tournament (won by Leeds) in mid-June 1894.

We also know that by early June the course was played, probably in something of an exhibition, by Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill, who are described as golf "experts", probably due to one of them already having laid out a course on his own property, and most likely due to them all being fervent and avid players prior to then, as was Dr. Hopkins and others.

So it seems extremely unlikely to me that both the club's contemporaneous records, which made clear that the original nine hole course was staked out by these three men, AND the contemporaneous news reports that made clear these "experts" were in charge of bringing golf to Myopia that spring, would both be somehow mistaken.

Instead, I believe that Campbell was likely brought up to Hamilton at some point prior to his engagement at Essex, and helped to get the course started, by "laying it out on the ground", most likely to the plan already determined by the aristocratic members.

As regards Leeds, it is likely in his role as the best golfer in Boston, and his opening day tournament win, that he was heavily involved in golf at Myopia from almost the very beginning, and since we already know his expertise was such that he was already asked to design Kebo Valley before that time, it is virtually certain that his historical attribution of both the Long Nine and the following 18 hole course were accurately attributed.

[TEPaul]

"To date, all we've known or been told here is that Merrill, Gardner, and Appleton were incompetent members unfamiliar with golf, and derided as the "Master of the Hounds", to accentuate the point."


Michael:

No it isn't. I told you all over a year ago that R.M. Appleton had a six hole golf course on his own farm BEFORE golf came to the Myopia Hunt Club. Just because Appleton happened to also be the Master of the Fox Hounds (essentially the captain of the Hunt in the fox hunting world) Tom MacWood seems to think that made it impossible for him to have known anything about golf. I mean I really can't imagine how anyone could have more of a one dimensional mind than MacWood if he actually thinks that. The appropriate term would probably be a myopic mind actually! That's obviously why he is such a terrible historical analyst!

Herbert Leeds was a remarkable athlete in all kinds of sports----star football and baseball player at Harvard, a world class sailor, a good tennis player and fox hunter, as well as obviously one of the very best golfers in Boston back then.

Once again, Appleton, Merrill and Gardner staked out the original 1894 nine at Myopia, not Willie Campbell. Myopia itself in its historical records never mentioned Willie Campbell except briefly in passing as one of the good Scottish teachers of that very early era. That's meaningful because they surely did mention all the others who worked for them over the years with their golf and their golf course including Robert White and their beloved John (Jack) Jones back in that era and in later years their beloved John Thoren and more recently and to date their highly respected Billy Safrin who's been there thirty years now and actually came to them from Philadelphia and Gulph Mills Golf Club. There is no question that Willie Campbell did something for Myopia, perhaps with their original course and later perhaps as their playing pro and golf teacher for a year but he clearly did not make the kind of impression on them that the others did.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I stand corrected.   I didn't mean that's what you told us about them.

It's how they've been portrayed by others here looking to mitigate/negate their role in the creation of the first nine holes at Myopia.

Apparently not only were the men involved with Mastery of the Hounds, but were known locally as golf "experts" by the time they were asked to bring a golf course to Myopia, which shows clearly how that term was used back then to indicate anyone with golfing knowledge and any sort of proficiency in the game.

[TEPaul]

"It's how they've been portrayed by others here looking to mitigate/negate their role in the creation of the first nine holes at Myopia."


It is? Which "others"------other than Tom MacWood of course?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I'm pretty sure if I scroll back through the pages of this thread that there were others who believe Campbell did the design of the first nine at Myopia with no involvement of the three members in question.

I just want to make sure that ALL of the facts and timelines are put on the table here and folks can make their own determinations.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Your story keeps changing. Do you have any evidence to support your theories? There is plenty of evidence supporting Campbell's involvement.

[Tom MacWood]

I asked the question a few days ago who had a more impressive resume than HJ Tweedie in 1900, and no one could come up with a name. I'm not sure if this is more impressive or not, but Willie Campbell's list of American designs is pretty impressive:

The Country Club, MA
Essex County, MA
Myopia Hunt, MA
Franklin Park, MA
Winchester, MA
Tatnuck, MA
Salem, MA
Topsfield, MA
Hawthorn, MA
Cambridge, MA
Nahant, MA
Wakefield, MA
Bridgewater, MA
Beaver Meadow, NH
Wannamoisett, RI
Merion Cricket, PA
Belmont Cricket, PA
Philadelphia, PA
Huntingdon Valley, PA
Moorestown Field, NJ

[TEPaul]

"I just want to make sure that ALL of the facts and timelines are put on the table here and folks can make their own determinations."


Mike:

The facts and timelines of Myopia's architectural evolution are on Post #393. If you want any more details on it I'd be glad to supply them, including a hole by hole evolution.

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba, This would be a lot more productive if you refrained from misrepresenting the factual record.  

For example, you claim that "By May 13th [1894] we know that the location of the holes had already been determined, as the articles mentioned one could see the whole course from the high vantage point."   We "know"  this? Nonsense.  The article mentions the general location of where the course would be laid out.  It says nothing about whether or not the holes had been planned!  In fact, the article is clear that the course had not yet been laid out, and that one would be able to to see much of the course when it was laid out.  It says nothing about planning.   As for your hypocrisy regarding the meaning of the verb "to lay out," it is beyond the pale and deserves no comment.

For another example, you wrote that "we also know that by early June the course was played, probably in something of an exhibition, by Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill . . . "  Huh? An exhibition match?  Surely you aren't referring to the June 10th article are you?    Because that article DOES NOT mention anything about exhibition match that had already taken place.   Rather, the article mentions only the Myopia tournament that would take place on "Bunker Hill Day" which is June 17th, the day of the opening tournament.  You know, the tournament after which three different newspapers stated that Willie Campbell had laid out the course.  

You also base your conclusions on "the club's contemporaneous records," yet you haven't seen those records, have you?  

As for your blatant attempt to exaggerate the qualifications of many involved (exhibition matches, "experts") give us a break already.

Really Mike, your penchant for hyperbolic and unsupported conclusions doesnt help matters.  
__________________________________________

TEPaul, you wrote, in reference to my alternate routing suggested above:

Not really other than the fact that I have no idea why he would come up with what he called that 'alternative.' He did preface it with the admission that he has never been to Myopia so my only assumption is he must think there is some mystery to the architectural evolution of the courses of Myopia. I don't think there is much of any mystery to it at all and the facts of it are pretty much in the archives of the club although perhaps the accounts of it in the newspapers may skew that for reasons that are also understandable---in my opinion.

I still haven't seen the course and that is quite a disadvantage, but I am trying to muddle through and make sense of things.  There may be no mystery to you but then you have better access to the information than I do.   And as I explained above I have to go with the material to which I have ready access.  Based on that information, there remain a few mysteries in my mind, but maybe you can shed some light on those.  

The first mystery to me is that you mentioned that the current 8th hole (2nd hole on the original course and the 1898 version) is now called "school" and was part of the original nine.   I had been trying to figure out the 1894 holes myself, and had thought that the eighth wasn't likely among them because it just doesn't fit very well in the routing.  

Looking at the 1894 article, the next hole after "school" was "bulrushes" which was the short hole, and this makes some sense because "bulrushes" followed the hole you call "school" in 1898.    And according to the 1894 article, then came "hills," then "dale," then the finish at "pond."   Counting backward, that would make the hole you call "school" the fifth hole on the original nine.   But  what about holes 2-4 on that original nine?  The tee on the hole you call "school" is very close to what was the first green (now the second green) and I can't see how the routing came back here.  Where could these holes have been routed to make the routing work?    Plus what is now the 8th hole was called "prairie," not "school," on both the 1898 nine and the 18 hole course.  

In comparison, the course routes smoothly by using the current 2nd-6th, then bulrushes  (leaving off the current 7th and 8th holes.)  

One more question.  Are you absolutely certain that the land purchased was east of the existing course?    It seems strange they would purchase 50 acres of land to the east for just three holes, when most of the expansion was to the west.  

[DMoriarty]

Below is a portion of an Atlas from 1910 showing the course as it existed then and some of the neighboring property.  I've marked the routing I had figured in blue and the 8th in red.

Also note that, apparently, a bit of the course was still located on property owned by Bush.  The image makes it difficult to imagine just where the purchased 50 acres was located, which is why I asked whether you are sure that the purchase was for property east of the course.



_______________________________________________


Excerpt from Myopia Songs and Waltzes, 2nd edition, published in 1898.  (Original published in 1898.)  From the section written by M.K. Abbott:

"Golf has been introduced as a Myopia sport. Its  development has been principally due to the efforts of Mr. Bush and Mr. Parker, who, in the opinion of many, have laid out one of the best inland courses in the country".

While Mike will find that this absolute proof that Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner designed the course, I am not so sure what to make of it.  

Interesting, though, that none of the above three are mentioned.

[TEPaul]

David:

Holes 2-4 on the original 1894 nine were on or mostly on land owned by Dr. S.A. Hopkins. See Post #393. That is the same land on which the second half of #4, #5, and most of #6 and #7 were on in the 1900 eighteen hole course and are on today. For the Long Nine (1896-1900) three holes were built on the other side of the property (the so named "uphill" holes where #14, #15 and #16 are today and which were #7, #8, #9 on the Long Nine) and the holes on Hopkins' property were given up on the Long Nine (the sequence went from present #2 directly to #8). I hope that helps.

[Tom MacWood]

David
The only problem with your take on how '94 may have looked is the current second hole being involved. If you look at the names of the holes in 1894, if begins Kennels, Miles River, etc. I would think based on the names of the holes your second and third hole should be one and two.

Another problem, the idea that the original nine was changed (and it is possible it was changed) is based on Weeks account. To my knowledge no one has found any contemporaneous reports that the course was changed, with the possible exception of the report in 1895 that said the links was new.

This is what Weeks said in his history: We know the first links was on land of the club and of Dr. Hopkins. He does not say how he knows this. He also says the layout of the course is matter of speculation. He has no idea how the course was configured (he also says the holes on the ridge were not completed for couple of years 1896). He then goes on to describe the course (six holes) as if he knows how the course was configured. He claims it started with the present #2, the present #8, then the present #9 (bullrushes), then the shorter version of the Alps, then the present 12th, then the Pond, the present sixth. That is six holes.

Weeks claims when the snow melted in the spring of '94 Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner were staking out the course. We have no idea what supporting info he has to prove this. They then went to the executive committee and told them the course would be ready in three months. Where does that come from? There is no mention of Willie Campbell despite the fact there are numerous reports he laid out the course.

The one bit of evidence he does present is what he calls a terse entry in the Club records by S. Dacres Bush. "At a meeting of the Executive Committee about March 1894 it was decided to build a golf links on the Myopia ground. Accordingly the grounds were examined, and in opposition from a number of members because the ground was rough, nine greens were sodded and cut, and play began about June 1st, 1894..." Does that sound contemporaneous entry into the club records? He is not even certain of the date of the executive meeting reported in the Boston papers as March 13. Again there is no mention of Willie Campbell even though it was well documented he was involved.

Later in the book Weeks give us Dacres Bush's description of the Long Nine, which was in something called 'Golf: the triumph of Hope over Experience.' I suspect Weeks' terse entry in the 'Club records' was actually in this account. I'm curious when it was published.

Also according to Weeks' timeline  Leeds joined the club (no date), soon after he was appointed to the golf committee (no date), the preparing of the holes on the ridge were already begun (no date), then they asked Leeds to layout the Long Nine. This jives with what TEP has been selling us all along, although he seems to be altering his version slightly because he now appears the Long Nine existed prior to Leeds joining the club in 1896 (based on the 1895 report in the Boston paper). TEP recently asked the question why was it necessary for Leeds to have been a member of the club while redesigning the course.

Because of the lack of documented support it appears speculation plays a major part in Weeks account and for that reason I am skeptical of just about everything written in it. Also the fact he has no clue Campbell was involved makes his account highly dubious in my opinion.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()