[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

The reason I say that, as I'm sure you know, is simply that there is little info on exactly what those original three holes were on Hopkins land, and how close in configuration they may have been to the present 3-6 that Leeds designed a year or two later.

One would think they may have borne some resemblance simply because I agree with you that the only way to make the routing work if it ended up around todays 13 green as the closing hole, back at the top of the hill.  In other words, I think Weeks was mistaken that a version of todays 8th hole was the second back then, unless the routing somehow crossed from the Valley hole across the 2nd, played three unknown holes on Hopkins land, perhaps in a circle or triangular fashion, and then came back to the tee of the Pond hole....

Nah...I think Weeks admitted speculation was incorrect on that count.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
The reason I say that, as I'm sure you know, is simply that there is little info on exactly what those original three holes were on Hopkins land, and how close in configuration they may have been to the present 3-6 that Leeds designed a year or two later."


Michael:

That's all true and I certainly do know what you mean. That is precisely why about 4-5 years ago this got my attention and I brought it up to the club. Weeks did describe six holes that it appears he believed were part of the 1894 nine and it appears he drew some of his description from what Bush said about the nine hole course which was apparently Leeds's Long Nine.

There is no drawings of that 1894 nine I'm aware of and no photographs of any of its holes other than an 1895 photo of the first green. When one understands where that was it isn't hard to take the rest of the description of it at that time and figure out what it was. From there one pretty much can only extrapolate and I suppose assume that the 1894 nine may've ended next to where it began which is actually the 13th which was the last of six holes that Weeks tried to describe.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Yes, and we also know that before Weeks book was published that Don Wade of Golf Digest said the original nine holes totalled 2050 yards, something not mentioned by Weeks.

Coincidentally, Wade also stated the original nine was designed by Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill, so go figure! 

[TEPaul]

"Coincidentally, Wade also stated the original nine was designed by Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill, so go figure! "


Michael:

Yes he did. I did not know that until you mentioned it on here in the last week or so. When some on here read something like that they may tend to wonder if it was Wade who told Weeks about that since he wrote it before Weeks published his book or whether Weeks told Wade that before Wade wrote his article.

I realize we all may have different styles and methods of doing research and analyzing things but when I read something like that in Weeks's book and the thought occurs to me where he may've been looking when he wrote that information, my first inclination is to start at the time he was writing about and look there and go forward from there if I have to rather than starting with Wade in 1974 or Weeks in 1975 and go backward looking for the first evidence of the mention of it. And I'm glad I did it that way as it saved me 80 to 81 years of looking through!  

[Tom MacWood]

"Coincidentally, Wade also stated the original nine was designed by Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill, so go figure! "


Michael:

Yes he did. I did not know that until you mentioned it on here in the last week or so. When some on here read something like that they may tend to wonder if it was Wade who told Weeks about that since he wrote it before Weeks published his book or whether Weeks told Wade that before Wade wrote his article.

I realize we all may have different styles and methods of doing research and analyzing things but when I read something like that in Weeks's book and the thought occurs to me where he may've been looking when he wrote that information, my first inclination is to start at the time he was writing about and look there and go forward from there if I have to rather than starting with Wade in 1974 or Weeks in 1975 and go backward looking for the first evidence of the mention of it. And I'm glad I did it that way as it saved me 80 to 81 years of looking through!  

TEP
Wade? Do you mean John P. May? I thought you had gone over the 'board minutes' and other internal documents, the same stuff Weeks supposedly based his book upon. It appears now you are not as confident in what you saw or as confident in what were Weeks' sources. I beginning to suspect you've been misleading us.....again.

[DMoriarty]

I realize we all may have different styles and methods of doing research and analyzing things but when I read something like that in Weeks's book and the thought occurs to me where he may've been looking when he wrote that information, my first inclination is to start at the time he was writing about and look there and go forward from there if I have to rather than starting with Wade in 1974 or Weeks in 1975 and go backward looking for the first evidence of the mention of it. And I'm glad I did it that way as it saved me 80 to 81 years of looking through!  

A very telling statement about your approach.  You just find someone who thinks they figured it out and then treat their speculation and conclusions as some sort of Gospel.  Also, you make up phony quotes and misrepresent information to make it seem like you have access to information you know nothing about.

I am not sure what I'd call this, but it sure isn't historical research and it sure isn't historical analysis. 

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood and David Moriarty:

You two can say anything you want to no matter how far-fetched and from your last posts and many others like them that's just what you do say on here. That's fine with me as neither of you have the slightest idea what you're talking about or what is at Myopia as neither of you have ever been there. Your collective tenor about this is getting more and more far-fetched, frustrated and hysterical, and that is about what I would expect from you two as others come to see what you two are really up to on here with some of the significant course histories, particularly Merion's and Myopia's and now apparently Shinnecock's too.   

[DMoriarty]

To the contrary, with each course discussed the absurdity of your approach becomes more obvious.    You have no idea what happened at any of these places, and are unwilling and/or incapable of figuring it out.  You just blindly parrot the status quo, fudging the record as you go along, with no real interest in or understanding of what might really have happened.

While you set yourself up as protector of these clubs, you repeatedly embarrass them, and seem to be on a self-destructive  mission to portray yourself and them as nothing but foolish and snobbish old bats with no clue or concern about what might have actually happened.   Fortunately, I have too much respect for these clubs to believe that most of their members could ever be anything close to what you are.

[TEPaul]

David Moriarty:

You can go on saying things like that on here if you want to but I doubt it makes any difference to anyone; I doubt it ever did.  


"Fortunately, I have too much respect for these clubs to believe that most of their members could ever be anything close to what you are."


Well, something that is more fortunate still is that you are most certainly unlikely to ever know that about them either.   And to think when you first came on this website you actually called me up to get me to give you the telephone # of my old friend the long time green chairman of Maidstone so you could try to gain access to play there. My how things have changed, wouldn't you say?    

[DMoriarty]

Well, something that is more fortunate still is that you are most certainly unlikely to ever know that about them either.   And to think when you first came on this website you actually called me up to get me to give you the telephone # of my old friend the long time green chairman of Maidstone so you could try to gain access to play there. My how things have changed, wouldn't you say?    

Naturally, you can't even be honest about this.   I was invited to play the course by the green chairman and lost his phone number, so I asked you if you had it.  Had I known then that you are such a scumbag that you would try and lord this over me almost a decade later and on a public website, I assure you I would have asked someone else.  

But thanks for the further demonstration of just what a class act you really are.

And TEPaul, I don't run in your circles but I know some people who do. Their assessment of you is spot on, and makes me confident in my assessment of them.    You should realize that if many if not most of the members of these clubs knew you pretended to speak for them, they would cringe. 

[TEPaul]

David Moriarty:

So, it's scumbag now, is it? 

As a pretty good number of people on here and who have been on here know, I've known a whole lot of people for various reasons over the years at these particular clubs (the likes of Merion, Myopia and Shinnecock et al) you've made the object of whatever it is you think you're doing on this website, but I don't know all of them at those clubs, that's for sure. I suppose there may be a few you know that from the sound of what you say I would not really ever care to know but on the other hand I don't believe a thing you say in that vein. Sorry about that but your credibility is pretty much totally shot on here, as far as I'm concerned, and I expect everyone of any worth knows that, at this point.

Happy New Year to you; I hope you can find some way to do better on here next year if you're still on here. With the likes of you and MacWood on here perhaps I will make a New Year's resolution not to be. I've got plenty to do with architecture other than this place and that's exactly what I do hear from those friends of mine at those clubs.

[Mike Cirba]

Guys,

Can we drop the personal stuff and get back to discussing the early courses at Myopia as well as "methods of research"?

I think news articles are an interesting and valuable source of corroborating information but we also jave to consider that if we call guys like Leeds, who had probably been golfing for two years by spring 1894 "beginNers" in the brand new game here, we also have to understand that the newsmen, who we've seen here copping misinformation from one another's stories and making the most fundamental of errors were/are really an imperfect source, much less to re-write a club history from.

Personally, I'd be interested and curious to see a tally of just the factual errors in news articles on this thread alone, even omitting one's like Pickering designing Merion, which I posted simply to illustrate their unreliability.

[DMoriarty]

David Moriarty:

So, it's scumbag now, is it?

I'd say "scumbag" is a pretty tame description, considering how you have continued to misrepresent that particular event.  I mean what kind of a person lies about something like that, anyway?   And on a public webstie.  I can think of many words more accurate than "scumbag" but most are more offensive.  I guess I could have gone with low class jerk, if you would prefer that.

_________________________________________

Mike Cirba,

We aren't "discussing" Myopia.  You are just telling us over and over again how you have convinced yourself to ignore multiple contemporaneous accounts indicating that Campbell laid out the course.

If can figure out a way to ignore multiple contemporaneous accounts indicating that Campbell laid out the course,  then obviously you are unwilling or unable to honestly consider the source material.  

Good luck with that.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Two years prior? I'll give you the two rounds in November and December of 1893 (whatever you want to make of those), but two years prior I think is very unlikely considering the reports he was a beginner in the spring of 1894. Do you have anything concrete or is this wishful thinking?

I've done quite a bit of research on Leeds and in 1893 he seems to be completely focused on the America's Cup (ending in October). In 1892 he seems focused on other sport, including tennis, and travel overseas.

What does Leeds playing experience have to do with who laid out Myopia in 1894?

[Mike Cirba]

David/Tom,

What about the 1894 news articles do you find credible, knowledgeable, or somehow convincing?

There are laughable, obvious mistakes throughout;  and on this foundation of Charmin you believe the club should burn their club minutes and contemporaneous records and recollections and rewrite their history??!

That would be hysterically funny if you weren't actually both somehow serious.

[DMoriarty]

David,

It won't be buried.

I really want to fully explore the value of and reliance on using vintage newspaper articles as primary source material for architectural historical research.

No Mike.  I want to fully explore the vast gaps between your bombastic claims and the actual factual record, as well as the inherent problems with your dismissal of this particular newspaper article.    You claimed that this article contained "laughable, obvious mistakes throughout."   You compared it to toilet paper, and claimed that accepting it as true would mean that the clubs would need to "burn their club minutes and contemporaneous records and recollections and rewrite their history."

So, back up your claims.   

Here again is the article.  Read it carefully.    Then explain me again how you can so easily dismiss it, and point toward those portions of Myopia's record that contradicts it.   

It is time for you to quit playing games and start HONESTLY dealing with the source material.     



1. Where, specifically, are the "laughable, obvious mistakes throughout?"  Because I see none.

2. What specific portions of Myopia's club minutes does this contradict, and what records and recollections does it call into question?   Because I am unaware of any such minutes, records, or recollections.   



 

Thanks.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

I'm on a blackberry right now and can't see which of the articles you posted..I'll try to respond tomorrow once I read it..

In the meantime, who is the author of the article?

[TEPaul]

"Because I am unaware of any such minutes, records, or recollections."


David:


It would be more explanatory to say you are only unaware of what such minutes, records, or recollections say because you've never been to Myopia to look at them. I think you and Tom MacWood may be the only self proclaimed researchers/historians who have some philosophical aversion to actually going to the subjects that you two decide to tell us all have gotten their histories all wrong.

[Mike Cirba]

Mike
Two years prior? I'll give you the two rounds in November and December of 1893 (whatever you want to make of those), but two years prior I think is very unlikely considering the reports he was a beginner in the spring of 1894. Do you have anything concrete or is this wishful thinking?

I've done quite a bit of research on Leeds and in 1893 he seems to be completely focused on the America's Cup (ending in October). In 1892 he seems focused on other sport, including tennis, and travel overseas.

What does Leeds playing experience have to do with who laid out Myopia in 1894?

Tom,

Have you actually read the articles I posted from Nov/Dec 1893 that state that Leeds and friends have been playing golf avidly at The Country Club since the beginning of golf there and that some of them like Leeds were well on their way at becoming expert at it?

Didn't that course get laid out in late 1892 and open in the spring of 1893?   So by the time of the November 1893 article he would have minimally been playing all year, and by June of 1894 he would have been playing minimally a year and a half.

Did you also read the article about Morton Henry that states he and his friends have been playing golf prior to then at estate courses like Hunnewell's going back to early 1892?   Don't you think Leeds was among them??

Is this the "he was too busy with other recreational pursuits to play golf" theory?  

I don't get you Tom...you'd rather believe that Leeds somehow became the best player in the club by six shots two months after picking up a club due to the magic of Willie Campbell than read the factual accounts that state these guys were playing golf for a number of years before Campbell arrived.  

[Mike Cirba]

David,

I see the article you posted is from the 1894 gossip column, "Summer Gayeties", which like most gossip columns doesn't identify the author.   I've used articles from a similar series in another Boston paper on this thread, as well. for better or worse.

I need to head out for a few hours, but will try to honestly and sincerely address your post, your questions, and your source material later today.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Two years prior? I'll give you the two rounds in November and December of 1893 (whatever you want to make of those), but two years prior I think is very unlikely considering the reports he was a beginner in the spring of 1894. Do you have anything concrete or is this wishful thinking?

I've done quite a bit of research on Leeds and in 1893 he seems to be completely focused on the America's Cup (ending in October). In 1892 he seems focused on other sport, including tennis, and travel overseas.

What does Leeds playing experience have to do with who laid out Myopia in 1894?

Tom,

Have you actually read the articles I posted from Nov/Dec 1893 that state that Leeds and friends have been playing golf avidly at The Country Club since the beginning of golf there and that some of them like Leeds were well on their way at becoming expert at it?

Didn't that course get laid out in late 1892 and open in the spring of 1893?   So by the time of the November 1893 article he would have minimally been playing all year, and by June of 1894 he would have been playing minimally a year and a half.

Did you also read the article about Morton Henry that states he and his friends have been playing golf prior to then at estate courses like Hunnewell's going back to early 1892?   Don't you think Leeds was among them??

Is this the "he was too busy with other recreational pursuits to play golf" theory?  

I don't get you Tom...you'd rather believe that Leeds somehow became the best player in the club by six shots two months after picking up a club due to the magic of Willie Campbell than read the factual accounts that state these guys were playing golf for a number of years before Campbell arrived.  

Mike
Why does it matter when Leeds began playing golf when determining who designed Myopia in 1894?

[DMoriarty]

David/Tom,

What about the 1894 nees articles do you find credible, knowledgable, or somehow convincing?

There are laughable, obvious mistakes throughout;  and on this foundation of Charmin you believe the club should burn their club minutes and contemporaneous records and recollections and rewrite their history??!

That would be hysterically funny if you weren't actually both somehow serious.

Mike, re-read what you just posted. You exaggerate and misrepresent throughout by understating the value of the newspaper accounts and by drastically overstating the content of Myopia's "club minutes" and "records and recollections." It is hyperbolic nonsense. 

Below is one of the articles stating that Campbell laid out the course.   I'd appreciate it if you would break it down for me.



1. Where, specifically, are the "laughable, obvious mistakes throughout?"  Because I see none.

2. What specific portions of Myopia's club minutes does this contradict, and what records and recollections does it call into question?   Because I am unaware of any such minutes, records, or recollections.   

Thanks.

[Note: Post accidently deleted later but recreated from copy.]

[TEPaul]

"From about 1893 on however, a veritable craze swept over the country, and Shinnecock Hills became the Mecca for golfing pilgrims from other sections of the country, seeking information before starting to construct their own links. Among these pilgrims, probably earlier than 1893, I distinctly remember a visit from Herbert Leeds, of Boston, always a foremost figure in the country in all matters connected to outdoor sport."*

*(from------Some Facts, Reminiscences, Personal Recollections Connected to the Introduction of the Game of Golf into the United States More Especially as Associated with the Formation of the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club (Incorporated Sept, 22, 1891)----Samuel Parrish, May 1, 1923)

[Mike Cirba]

Tom Paul,

That's very interesting and consistent with my findings that Leeds was playing golf well before 1894.

Tom MacWood,

To answer your question, it has nothing to do with who designed Myopia in 1894.

It has everything to do with your contention here that Leeds learned the game and about course architecture from Willie Campbell, neither of which is supported by any historical evidence.

He had been playing for at least 12-16 months prior to Campbell's arrival here and was already the top amateur in Boston by that time.

Tom Paul's post with Parrish's memories of Leeds takes it back even further.

[DMoriarty]

TEPaul,

Nice to see you are finally getting around to reading my posts on Shinnecock.   As I said, that Parrish work is worth the read.   

Mike Cirba,

Good luck relying on the details of that Parrish work I provided to you, TEPaul, and everyone else.   It has as much wrong as Willie Dunn's recollections of the formation of the course, and TEPaul has pronounced Dunn to be the biggest liar in the world.   

__________________

Mike Cirba, still waiting on an answer to those questions you have twice said you would answer.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()