[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba, have you ever noticed that when you post these indignant, over-the-top posts, that you are almost always wrong?  

The reason is that bombastic incredulity, no matter how heart-felt and well-meaning, can never trump the contemporaneous source material.  Reportedly, the course was laid out no earlier than mid to late May.  If you have facts that contradict thes reports, bring them forward.  Your childish outbusts don't cut it.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Perhaps if you attempted to answer the obvious question(s) based on the facts we do know we could actually have a decent conversation about the origins of the game in this country.

It's not a trick question.

[DMoriarty]

You chastise me for not answering your questions?  I am still waiting for an answer to mine.  

How would I know that specifically the locals rules were.  I wasn't there.  All I know is what was reported:

"The rules of these links are adapted to the layout and include some peciliar to the grounds.  The links are as yet new and rough but the natural features are such that they will in a short time be equal to any in this vicinity."  

Hardly sounds like ideal playing conditions.   But then that makes sense.  After all, reportedly Campbell had just laid out the links some time in the last month.    By the way Mike, at Shinnecock in 1891 they were reportedly golfing on their nine hole course very soon after it was laid out.

As for a conversation about the origins of the game, that'd be great, but if you cannot even honestly deal with unambiguous accounts about who laid out Myopia, I don't think there is even any reason to bother.  For the conversation to be at all worth while you would need to set aside all your unreasonable assumptions about "amateur sportsmen," and "scratch golfers" who shot 112, and "expert golfers" who were lucky to shoot in the 120's, and a host of other untenable interpretations that you think unequivocally address the main issues.

Come up with some facts or give it up.  You are wasting your time and ours.  

[Mike Cirba]

David,

I'm not the one who called Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill "experts"...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who claimed (inaccurately) that HC Leeds had only taken up the game that spring...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who claimed that Dr. Hopkins was playing amazing golf one week after having touched a club...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who claimed that Leeds beat Hopkins by "two points"...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who wrote that the Opening Day tournament at Myopia was played at Essex in Manchester...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who wrote that a Prof (as in Professor)  Campbell was giving lessons at The Country Club...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

I'm not the one who claimed that "two new links" were opening at Myopia...your vaunted gossip columnist did.

So in a flurry of posted blurbs that spring that mentioned Essex and Myopia almost synonymously, why am I wrong to have some doubts that this expert writer was actually talking about Myopia when Essex was being redesigned by Campbell at the same time?

Why is it wrong to question that when we know that Campbell was brought over here to work in a shared arrangement with The Country Club and Essex, (but not Myopia) both of which he then redesigned?

Is there even one other attributed mention of Campbell designing Myopia that is not associated with the Opening Day tournament and what you must admit is a lot of bollocks on multiple fronts?  

If there is, I don't recall seeing it.

How long after sod was laid at Shinnecock were they playing?

Don't you think the local rules adapted to the grounds were more about stone walls, horse poop, and perhaps free drops from untended areas than rules about how putting would be impossible if the greens were brand new sod placed there two weeks previously?  

I mean, why even play if you can't putt out?   How would you actually post a score??

Did you ever think that perhaps the members thought Campbell would have some native expertise in laying sod and building/planting a green, and perhaps that's the extent of what he did for them in May?   That he came and laid out tees, greens, and perhaps some artificial hazards on the grounds previously mapped by Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner?    Frankly, that's what it's sounding like to me.

Where do you think John P. May from Golf Digest got his information from that Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner designed Myopia's first course and that it was 2050 yards long when he wrote that in 1974, prior to the Weeks book

In case you don't have the book, he wrote;

It was in 1894, however, that the club's first nine golf holes, measuring only 2,050 yards, were laid out by three club members, R. M. Appleton, T. Wattson Merrill and A. P. Gardner."

Do you think this is pure coincidence?   

Why do you think they needed/wanted to use land from Dr. Hopkins on this first course?   Do you think this is something that Campbell suggested to them if he was the one responsible for the layout?   Doesn't this seem like an odd request to you if it was coming from an outsider?   What if I told you that this is the lowest-lying, wettest, most problematic land on the property?   Why do you think they moved away from it when Leeds laid out his "long nine"?

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Where do you think the story about the Squire & Co laying out the course originated? If true you would've thought one of the numerous gossip/society page columnists would have written at least one mention. And apparently Weeks had no internal document to quote from regarding it. It really doesn't add up when you consider what was being reported at the time and WC's being on the scene and his activity. You have to admit the story is very strange. What is your latest scenario to explain what happened?

[Tom MacWood]

And perhaps the strangest part of the story is Willie Campbell being completely written out of it despite the fact he was credited at the time for laying out the course (by numerous sources) and the fact he worked at the club. What is your theory about that?

[Niall C]

Niall,

Good point, and agree that it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing.

I just find it very odd that the course was supposedly not routed by May 19th, yet was sodded and opened for play about 10 days later.

Melvyn in another thread tells us that courses took about 3 months from inception to opening in those very early days, and I'm presuming he's talking mostly about linksland, sandy soils.  

I simply can't imagine how one could route, sod, grow-in, and open a course within 10 days, but perhaps I'm simply underestimating the skills of Willie Campbell.

Mike

You could well be right about the course having been already routed, I just think it is hard to be conclusive based on newspaper articles.

I wouldn't necessarily dispute Melvyns reckoning either although I'm sure timescales would have varied dependant on turf/soil/vegetation etc. I've read a number of articles from that time which refer to ground under pasture as being the best inland ground to lay out a course on as the grass or "old turf" was already there. From memory Park talks about it as well in his book.

Also from what I read they didn't necessarily hold back play for some grand opening or until the course was "ready". The thought was that foot traffic helped consolidate the turf ie compress it and flatten it. Old Tom and indeed Park talked about having the tees forward at first and then putting them back once the ground had been consolidated by play. I would imagine that would have been the way things were generally done back then and Willie Campbell would have proposed the same. Likewise with the greens, Park talks about alternative greens while the main greens are rested. I can't recall if he specifically rights about building rough and ready temp greens while the new greens nit in properly but I suppose its a possibility.

The point is, they didn't tend to wait for some beautifully finished product back then, they got on with hitting the wee white ball as soon as there was something reasonable to play on, and that this play in turn helped the course.

Niall

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I think a lot of scenarios are possible, even plausible.

As I mentioned though, I think both stories are true.

I think what happened is simply that because Campbell was not formally employed by Myopia, but likely working informally under the close relationship with TCC and Essex, that he simply wasn't recorded in the club's administrative records, thus the Weeks omission.

[Tom MacWood]

I think what happened is simply that because Campbell was not formally employed by Myopia, but likely working informally under the close relationship with TCC and Essex, that he simply wasn't recorded in the club's administrative records, thus the Weeks omission.
 

Mike
The facts don't support your theory. Campbell only worked one summer in 1894 at Essex County. He worked at TCC in 1894 & 1895, and it was widely reported at the end on 1895 they would not be rehiring him.

There are numerous reports in 1896 that Campbell was pro at Myopia, most of his obituaries mentioned he was the pro at Myopia, and in a story on his wife in 1902 it was reported he was the pro at Myopia. That doesn't sound informal to me, but even if it was informal everyone seemed to know he was connected with Myopia including Herd and Kilkardy when they visited in 1906. Do you have any other theories?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I'm talking about Campbell not being under direct employ of Myopia in spring of 1894 when the course was designed and laid out, whatever that entailed.  That is what I think wasn't in the administrative records that Weeks worked from.

As far as his brief stint as the club pro, I think either Weeks omitted because of the short stint or simply overlooked.

Just speculation, but in spring of 1894 we know he was directly employed by TCC and Essex, and I'm thinking anything he did for Myopia (given the cross-population of memberships between the three clubs) was likely done informally and off the record, thus the Weeks omission.

As far as Herd and Kirklady, all I recall is that there was some discussion in an article that Campbell had played this or that hole a certain way, and we know Campbell had the course record, probably still at that point.   I don't really see that as all that important to the original design question.

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba,

As is your wont, you dishonestly twist and distort the record to try and make your unreasonable points.   For example there was no single "gossip columnist" responsible for all those articles.   The information you list came from a variety of papers, articles and columns.   And you cannot conclude an article is mistaken just because you refuse to interpret it in the context of the time.   For example, as used the reference to "expert players" was no mistake.  The mistake was your absurd stretch that this was somehow proof that AM&G designed the course.   

But set aside ALL the articles for a minute -- after all by your logic they all must be invalid.  What is out there that supports your interpretation?

WHAT CONTEMPORARY SOURCE MATERIAL SUPPORTS YOUR NOTION THAT AM&G DESIGNED THE COURSE?

[Mike Cirba]

Here's a few more related articles...

On the first, from January 21st, 1894 talks a little about the golfing interests of Mr. Burnham, who along with Appleton and Merrill were named to the subcommittee to bring golf to Myopia that year.   Mr. Burnham also served on the golf committee of The Country Club at Brookline that same year.




This one I posted previously from April 15th, 1894 mentions multiple related matters.  Interestingly, the first golf course at Essex had actually opened in July of the previous year;




The next article(s), from May 13th, 1894 projects the Opening Day of the course consistent with S. Dacre Bush's recollection of June 1st.   The second article again mentions both Appleton and Gardner as being expert at golf prior to the course being opened.




The final article, from May 27th, 1894, talks about the course(s?) at Appleton Farm(s?).

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

I'm talking about Campbell not being under direct employ of Myopia in spring of 1894 when the course was designed and laid out, whatever that entailed.  That is what I think wasn't in the administrative records that Weeks worked from.

As far as his brief stint as the club pro, I think either Weeks omitted because of the short stint or simply overlooked.

Just speculation, but in spring of 1894 we know he was directly employed by TCC and Essex, and I'm thinking anything he did for Myopia (given the cross-population of memberships between the three clubs) was likely done informally and off the record, thus the Weeks omission.

As far as Herd and Kirklady, all I recall is that there was some discussion in an article that Campbell had played this or that hole a certain way, and we know Campbell had the course record, probably still at that point.   I don't really see that as all that important to the original design question.

What administrative records?

Willie Campbell was not directly employed by the vast majority of courses he designed, most golf architects are not employees of most clubs they designed. Not being an employee did not stop most clubs from crediting WC.

Willie Campbell set the course record when the course was 9-holes. It had been an 18-hole course for eight years when Herd & Kirkaldy visited, and Campbell had been dead for six years. The idea that they would known he set the course record on the old course (when he was the pro), but they would not be aware he was the pro at Myopia is pretty bizarre. By the way it was reported in the UK he was the pro at Myopia.

It is important to the question who designed the original course because whoever is the source for the Squire & Co designing the course is apparently not aware of Campbell's involvement, either as the architect or the club's pro. You combine that knowledge gap with the fact their are no contemporaneous reports the Squire & Co were involved in any way and I think you have to question the credibility of your one and only source.

[Tom MacWood]

Here's a few more related articles...

On the first, from January 21st, 1894 talks a little about the golfing interests of Mr. Burnham, who along with Appleton and Merrill were named to the subcommittee to bring golf to Myopia that year.   Mr. Burnham also served on the golf committee of The Country Club at Brookline that same year.




This one I posted previously from April 15th, 1894 mentions multiple related matters.  Interestingly, the first golf course at Essex had actually opened in July of the previous year;




The next article(s), from May 13th, 1894 projects the Opening Day of the course consistent with S. Dacre Bush's recollection of June 1st.   The second article again mentions both Appleton and Gardner as being expert at golf prior to the course being opened.




The final article, from May 27th, 1894, talks about the course(s?) at Appleton Farm(s?).

So what does all this add up to? Based on this can you give us your current theory of what happened and when?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

My point of posting those articles is that there is still a lot of unknowns here, and this is more evidence for everyone to consider.

Did RM Appleton have a course before his brother?

Who knew previously that all of the identified members of Myopia had significant previous golf experience and were known as local "experts"?

Who else mentioned a June 1st Opening date, consistent with the remembrances of S. Dacre Bush?

So, while we're all trying to piece this together I thought they were relevant.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Macwood,

You stated about Campbell, "Willie Campbell was not directly employed by the vast majority of courses he designed, most golf architects are not employees of most clubs they designed. Not being an employee did not stop most clubs from crediting WC."

So are you stating that:
1- You are aware of some clubs that don't credit him as the designer when he actually was? If so, which ones?
2- You used the word "most" because you believe it to be a true statement that you made but can't give proof of it?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

As far as administrative records, we know that Weeks references the administrative "Run Book", Leeds' scrapbook, and the recollections of S. Dacre Bush.   We also know that May from Golf Digest referenced the same three members designing the course prior to Weeks book, but also had info (that the course was 2,050 yards) not included by Weeks.   I'm not sure why this is a point of debate?  

I'm betting that the administrative records of other clubs who "hired" Campbell to do work for them indicated that in their records, especially if they paid him.

My point here is that he likely did any of his 1894 work for Myopia as part of his broader duties as a dual employee of TCC and Essex, given the incestuous fraternization and cross-memberships of the three clubs.

***EDIT*** I was just informed by another person who has the Weeks book that the listing of Club Champions has 1895 (Henry) and 1896 (Leeds) listed, but then strangely states "No Record" for the years 1897-1904, picking up again in 1905.   It seems very possible that perhaps the club minutes for that period were either not available to Weeks or somehow lost.   That might explain the omission of Campbell's 1898 stint as golf pro from Weeks book.

As far as Kirkaldy's mention of Campbell, these are the articles I have in that regard.   The first is very interesting in that it speaks directly to where HC Leeds got his design influences from;




The next article is where Kirkaldy mentions Willie Campbell at Myopia;





David and Tom,

Strange, but I don't recall you embracing this contemporaneous account from a "Gossip Column" in a Philadelphia newspaper that reported the opening of the new Merion course in September 1912?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

My point of posting those articles is that there is still a lot of unknowns here, and this is more evidence for everyone to consider.

Did RM Appleton have a course before his brother?

Who knew previously that all of the identified members of Myopia had significant previous golf experience and were known as local "experts"?

Who else mentioned a June 1st Opening date, consistent with the remembrances of S. Dacre Bush?

So, while we're all trying to piece this together I thought they were relevant.

You are just grasping for straws. The golf course was at Appleton Farm, Francis's place.

You put more weight in the term golfing expert than any one I know. It was a relative term, and those same golf experts were members at TCC and Essex County, and as you know they turned to a real golf expert. WB Thomas was responsible for Campbell coming to Boston

Yes, June 1 is consistent with what Bush wrote. Why is that significant? It was reported the golf course actually opened mid-June.

So from your non-answer I guess you are saying those blurbs don't really add up to anything.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom Macwood,

You stated about Campbell, "Willie Campbell was not directly employed by the vast majority of courses he designed, most golf architects are not employees of most clubs they designed. Not being an employee did not stop most clubs from crediting WC."

So are you stating that:
1- You are aware of some clubs that don't credit him as the designer when he actually was? If so, which ones?
2- You used the word "most" because you believe it to be a true statement that you made but can't give proof of it?

Phil
I'm saying Campbell was not the professional at the majority of courses he designed. Mike said Campbell was not the pro at Myopia at 1894 and because he wasn't the pro they probably wouldn't have had record of him being involved. The fact that he wasn't employed as the professional should have no bearing IMO.

[DMoriarty]

First Mike, starting near the end of the latest batch of newspaper accounts you are twisting and turning to support your unsupportable theories . . .  

I have always agreed that Hugh Wilson went abroad to get ideas for the new course at Merion - AFTER IT WAS BUILT.   And I have always acknowledged that he "helped largely in the planning of the holes" at Merion.   This is what was happening at NGLA, and during the few weeks between NGLA and when CBM and HJW returned to finalize their layout plan, and then probably even after the plan CBM approved had been submitted to the board and construction began.  But once again, you twist both the facts and my ideas to try and make your pithy points.  

As for the rest of these articles, I hope anyone still bothering to read has noticed your hypocritical methodology.  
-  You throw out the only newspaper articles we have that actually directly address the issue based on the faulty logic that because some articles contain errors, these must, too.  
-  Once you have disposed of the relevant articles you then parade out all sorts of articles, that while interesting, are pretty useless when it comes to addressing the issue at hand.
-  Then you start in on all sorts in illogical implications and suppositions from this latest batch of articles, as if you hadn't just damned all newspaper articles out of the conversation.

It doesn't work that way Mike.  You cannot throw out relevant and then accept and stretch the irrelevant.  If articles are as inaccurate and unreliable as you say, then this entire batch of articles has no place in this conversation.  

So, answer my question:  

WHAT CONTEMPORARY SOURCE MATERIAL SUPPORTS YOUR NOTION THAT AM&G DESIGNED THE COURSE?

Even if you used articles, you cannot meaningfully answer.  But without your stretched and twisted articles?  You have a blank page.

______________________________________________

Other of your Suppositions:

-  The Mystical "Leeds Scrapbook" counts as an Administrative Record?  Even covering events from before Leeds was a member of the Club?    You are funny.

-  You conclude that the "Run Book" was definitely there in 1896 and before, but then went blank from 1897 to 1905?  Perhaps it should have been called the "Skip Book."  

-  A more reasonable explanation is that whatever records Weeks had, they didn't much consider golf, and the information from 1895 and 1896 came from somewhere else.  For example, the account I have repeatedly mentioned from 1897 indicates the Club Champions from 1895 and 1896, but then not after (for obvious reasons.)

- Fancy how the Mystical "Leeds Scrapbook" is also apparently missing information about golf at Myopia from 1897 to 1905.  Or was the scrapbook so detailed about other golf matters that it didn't bother to list any of the Club Championships?  I think that the only safe assumption, and the one we should embrace as truth, is that Mr. Leeds himself was the Champion for all these years, but his modesty as an "amateur sportsmen" precluded him from mentioning his feat even in his own "Scrapbook," a book affectionately described by some as more like Leeds' diary.   "Dear Diary, someone we know won again, but it wouldn't befit an amateur sportsman such as myself to tell you who . . . "

- Campbell was the professional at Myopia in 1896, not 1898, but nice try.  

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Why would a writer state that Appleton had a golf course on his farm, which is near to his brother's farm?

The topic was the golf course, not the farm.   Who cares if his farm is near his brother's?

Are you certain that there wasn't a golf course on each brother's property?  

As far as the term "expert", prior to my research you would have had us believe that none of them, including Leeds played golf before 1894, and the term you repeatedly used as "Master of the Hounds" to deride Appleton as knowing nothing about the game.   At one point you even speculated that some of them never even played the game, pointing to an erroneous article that didn't list them in the Opening Day tournament at Myopia, that I later corrected.

We've since learned much differently, and we've learned that all these men were avidly and fervently playing golf at TCC and probably at least Hunnewell's estate course (and possibly Appleton's) for over a year before Myopia was laid out.

As regards the Opening date, we know the tournament was held on June 17th, but we don't know when they started playing.   Dacre Bush told us it was around June 1st.   I think this is important based on the odd report of May 19th that the course hadn't been laid out yet, which seems incredible, if not unbelievable if they used sod, which we also now know they did.

I think all of these things are very relevant to getting the whole picture painted.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Where did Weeks' quote from the Run Book regarding the design of the course?

Same with the Leeds scrapbook when did Week's quote from it? And why would the scrap book be important regarding the events of 1894 when Leeds didn't even join the club until 1896?

Recollections are not contemporaneous administrative records, and Bush never mentions who designed the golf course.

Do you know who or what is the source for the story that the Squire & Co designed the course?

I don't think it is any great mystery why Campbell was called to design Brookline, Essex County and Myopia, or why he designed so many golf courses in the region in the late 90s. He was the resident expert.

Campbell was the pro at Myopia in 1896, so the lost records theory is out the window.

I don't think it is surprising Kilkardy mentions Leeds design activity considering he had been working on the course for almost a decade.

The reason I didn't discount the gossip columnist is because I don't dismiss society columns out of hand, and the column is consistent with my understanding of what transpired. I don't want to turn this into another Merion thread but I have said IMO the turning point at Merion occured when Wilson went overseas, it was only after that trip he began to assert his design influence.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Why would a writer state that Appleton had a golf course on his farm, which is near to his brother's farm?

The topic was the golf course, not the farm.   Who cares if his farm is near his brother's?

Are you certain that there wasn't a golf course on each brother's property? 

As far as the term "expert", prior to my research you would have had us believe that none of them, including Leeds played golf before 1894, and the term you repeatedly used as "Master of the Hounds" to deride Appleton as knowing nothing about the game.   At one point you even speculated that some of them never even played the game, pointing to an erroneous article that didn't list them in the Opening Day tournament at Myopia, that I later corrected.

We've since learned much differently, and we've learned that all these men were avidly and fervently playing golf at TCC and probably at least Hunnewell's estate course (and possibly Appleton's) for over a year before Myopia was laid out.

As regards the Opening date, we know the tournament was held on June 17th, but we don't know when they started playing.   Dacre Bush told us it was around June 1st.   I think this is important based on the odd report of May 19th that the course hadn't been laid out yet, which seems incredible, if not unbelievable if they used sod, which we also now know they did.

I think all of these things are very relevant to getting the whole picture painted.

Obviously they were referring to the proximity of the farms. There were a handful of private golf courses around Boston that were mentioned in different publications. I've never seen a mention of a golf course at RM Appleton's farm.

I don't think the time frame is that incredible based on the fact that there is no mention of sod being laid at Myopia (or Brookline or Essex County).

It seems to me you are grasping for straws.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

Thanks for clearing that up. The way you worded it, "Not being an employee did not stop most clubs from crediting WC." seemed to indicate to me that you were speaking more to giving him credit as a designer than as to his being employed by a club as a professional...

[DMoriarty]

Mike Cirba,

How come your attempts "to get the whole picture painted" leave out all the best evidence we have as to who laid out the course? Your big picture is by Rorshach.  You reach the same conclusion no matter what the facts.

How come you are posting all these articles after pleading for weeks that all such articles must be discarded as inaccurate?

WHAT CONTEMPORARY SOURCE MATERIAL SUPPORTS YOUR NOTION THAT AM&G DESIGNED THE COURSE?

I've answered your questions, yet you won't answer mine?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()