[Kevin Lynch]

If this had been a court, I suspect most of the participants would have been cited for contempt by now.
 

[Kevin Lynch]

No need for a judge or jury;  anyone interested can make up their own mind and that's probably as it should be in these minor matters.

As much as some want a "resolution" to this topic, I think Mike's final statement is true.

Mike has repeatedly expressed his reasons why he has doubts about David and Tom's assertions.  Are they reasonable doubts? That is really up to each person to decide for themselves. More point/counterpoint discussion isn't going to advance things any further.

I have been through all 43 pages of this, and I'm not thoroughly convinced of any of the theories advanced.

And that's fine with me, because it has still been interesting reading about the early development of Golf in America.

[Mike Cirba]

David,

If either of us had any further evidence to provide here, we should really do it now or just let it rest.

We've made our points...don't you think?

Good night,

[Tom MacWood]

~

[Tom MacWood]

As much as some want a "resolution" to this topic, I think Mike's final statement is true.

Mike has repeatedly expressed his reasons why he has doubts about David and Tom's assertions.  Are they reasonable doubts? That is really up to each person to decide for themselves. More point/counterpoint discussion isn't going to advance things any further.

I have been through all 43 pages of this, and I'm not thoroughly convinced of any of the theories advanced.

And that's fine with me, because it has still been interesting reading about the early development of Golf in America.

Kevin
Note the title of the thread. There is no one still remaining on this thread who does not acknowledge Campbell laid out the course in 1894 and Campbell was the pro in 1896, accept you. And that ain't no theory; that is a fact.

Way to go. I'm not sure the purpose of your post other than to make us all question your intelligence, judgement and reading comprehension.

[Tom MacWood]

I believe David's was more a rhetorical question. By now we all know there are three contemporaneous reports Campbell laid out Myopia; no reports the Squire & Co. did anything. Really what this thread should be about is acknowledging and celebrating Willie Campbell's important contribution to early American golf architecture. That contribution has been under valued for sometime, in part due to him being completely written out of the Myopia history in error.

Here are Campbell's American designs in approximate chronological order. There are three other courses - Warren Farm, Pride's Crossing & Appleton Farm - I suspect he was involved in laying out but have not found the confirming documentation as yet.  

The Country Club, MA 1894
Essex County, MA 1894
Myopia Hunt, MA 1894
Nahant, MA 1894
Wakefield, MA 1894
Merion Cricket, PA 1896
Belmont Cricket, PA 1896*
Philadelphia, PA 1896
Franklin Park, MA 1896
Huntingdon Valley, PA 1897
Winchester, MA 1897
Salem, MA 1897
Topsfield, MA 1897
Hawthorn, MA 1897
Cambridge, MA 1897
Wakefield Park, MA 1897
Bridgewater, MA 1897
Beaver Meadow, NH 1897
Wannamoisett, RI 1898
Tatnuck, MA 1898
Moorestown Field, NJ 1898
Oakley, MA 1898
Cohassett, MA 1899

* may or may not have been executed

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

I agree with most everything in your post above, especially starting with the third sentence!

Seriously, for all the goo, I read and enjoyed both your earlier IMO pieces on the early American architects, and the many articles you (and others) posted on Myopia and others of the time frame.  That part of the thread shows the true value of gca.com to any interested in gca in America, or elsewhere.

So, I learned a lot, which is never a bad thing.  Truth of the matter is, I didn't really like the methods of all my teachers back in grade school either, but I still remember some of the lessons!

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

As I said about 50 times, I agree that it's very likely that Willlie Campbell had something to do with the initial course at Myopia.   We just don't really know what that entailed, or the timing of it.

All we have is three very similar articles in three gossip columns related to the opening day tournament, and we know those papers either copied shamelessly from each other or had the same person moonlighting...after all, how many people were actually so "in the know" as to be able to hob nob with those upper-crust folks and yet still have to work for a living as an ink-stained wretch?  

Multiple of those gossip columns also reported that Myopia had "two links", and various other errors, so are we to accept that as factual, as well?

So, I think there is ample, if uncertain evidence that BOTH things happened...the members staked out a basic routing and Willie Campbell helped them get it up and going, probably helping with sod, green building, etc., and possibly revising in part or whole the original routing...we don't know.  

However, if everyone at Myopia was just going to wait around for Willie Campbell to arrive in the states in April and get some time away from his employ from TCC and Essex then there really wasn't even a point to assign a committee back in the March/April time frame....what was that committee going to do but wait for Willie to come at the end of May ten days before opening??  

As you often say, it makes no sense.

So, I think Campbell came and helped them get to the finish line.   What that work entailed we'll likely never know as there seems to be no record of it anywhere at Myopia, and we can't even be certain based on just huge errors and misunderstandings we've seen in those gossip columns that they didn't mix up his work with Essex, or even had some common understanding of what "laid out" meant in a way we'd think of it today.

I wish we knew more.   We don't.

Thanks for the information you brought forward.

[Phil_the_Author]

Kevin,

Welcome to the TMIMFNRC! That's the Tom Macwood Insulted Me For No Reason Club!

One normally gains entry as you did; after reasoning through a question and coming to a different conclusion than he did only to see him declare what is actual fact and how it is you who are in error! Of course his absolute "fact," that "There is no one still remaining on this thread who does not acknowledge Campbell laid out the course in 1894 and Campbell was the pro in 1896, accept you. And that ain't no theory; that is a fact" doesn't appear to be so absolute. For example, can anyone show me in what you posted that even mentions anything about Campbell and his laying out the course in any manner? Of course not. So either he is among the handful of most intuitive men on the planet in that he can read your thoughts through the internet or he is just winging it and making a blanket declaration in hopes that it will in some way stick and be accepted.

Interestingly, he doesn't quite say what Campbell's "laying out of the course" actually means that everyone but you are in agreement with, and since Ive been on this thread from very early on I guess that he believes that he is speaking for me as well. Thank you Tom for taking away the pressure of thinking and reasoning for myself... it was such a burden. Actually, if his understanding of that phrase means what I believe it does, then his "fact" needs to be more than a bit revised as I don't agree at all with what I believe he is implying, and the actual FACT is that there are a number of others who disagree as well...

Welcome to the club! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phillip,

Maybe when its your turn to be a lister you can give us top ten insults by TMac! Just kidding, and I have thrown out a few myself, but I also welcome Kevin to the club.  My biggest insult was him telling me I must have been hitting the nog too hard before posting.  I would be more upset, but it was actually at least a little clever (even if DM had posted a similar insult the minute before).  I can live with that as well as the occaisional grammatical error, since we all make those too.

But I do agree that he has, from time to time, made statements, waited a few weeks, and them brought them back as "fact."  I think we all know it happens, but probably 3/4 of these pages is guys like you and me not allowing them to have the last word, which I still think is the end result of this thread.  That said, I hope my next post is the last word on this thread, although I half expect a ten point response from David......

[Jeff_Brauer]

Word.

[DMoriarty]

So, I think there is ample, if uncertain evidence that BOTH things happened...the members staked out a basic routing and Willie Campbell helped them get it up and going, probably helping with sod, green building, etc., and possibly revising in part or whole the original routing...we don't know.  

Mike Cirba.  

Well since you are still posting on the matter, then how about we provide a list of the evidence. Specifically, why don't you list out the "ample evidence" that the members laid out the initial course.   Surely that ought to be simple.

Why is it that you will go on like this indefinitely, but when it comes to actually providing a synopsis of the state of the facts, you inevitably say the thread is over and you don't think it is necessary.   Wouldn't such a list be helpful to those who might want to "decide for themselves."

However, if everyone at Myopia was just going to wait around for Willie Campbell to arrive in the states in April and get some time away from his employ from TCC and Essex then there really wasn't even a point to assign a committee back in the March/April time frame....what was that committee going to do but wait for Willie to come at the end of May ten days before opening??

You've said this repeatedly, but it is a red herring.   The annual meeting - the meeting where they decided to build a golf course at Myopia -  occurred in March.   Do you think they should have postponed their annual meeting because the golf season would not begin until June?  

[Phil_the_Author]

Jeff,

There was absolutely no reason for him to insult Kevin as he did, and when you think about it, include myself, you, Mike and everyone else who has commented on this thread in the process.

I'm sorry, but his "fact" is nothing of the kind and demands at least a single disagreement. I'm not looking to get the last word; I learned a long time ago that isn't possible...  

Actually, I think it is time that he declared EXACTLY what he believes that campbell did in 1894 at Myopia by DEFINING what the phrase "laid out the course" meant in the case of MYOPIA. Then and ONLY then can his "fact" have any possibility of being proven. Of course, we in the TMIMFNRC are quite used to asking questions of him that he doesn't even deign to answer...

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Why appoint a committee at all then...why not just wait for Campbell to do his ten-day soup-to-nuts, instant-presto golf course gig?  

But since they DID assign a committee, what "measures" do you think they were assigned to take?

To just go to market and buy some sheep?  

[DMoriarty]

Because the Annual meeting was in March, and that was when such decisions were made.

As for what "measures" needed to be taken, the most obvious one is that someone had to hire Willie Campbell to lay out the course. Given that he would soon be arriving at the Country Club, and that these three were actively involved in golf at the Country Club, they were well positioned to hire him.  There was also the matter of clubs, balls, and whatever else equipment they would need for the course or to play the course.

Your version contradicts  the multiple accounts which note that the course had not yet been laid out as of mid-May.

Now how about that list of facts supporting your belief that AM&G laid out the course?

[Mike Cirba]

David,

As you stated multiple times here, it's very possible for a golf course to have been routed, or "staked out", yet not "laid out" on the ground, and/or constructed.

I'm pretty certain based on the evidence here that Campbell "laid out" the golf course on the ground.

He may have done more...we don't know.

[DMoriarty]

No, I've stated that it is quite possible to have planned a golf course yet not have laid it out on the ground.     Here, your story is that they had already staked out the golf course on the ground some time before the annual meeting.   "Staked out" and "laid out" were synonymous at this point in the history of gca.     Had they already staked out the course, there would have been little else for Campbell to do.     

Now how about that list of facts supporting your conclusions?

[Mike Cirba]

David,

I'm really not trying to be obtuse or purposefully frustrating here, but I'm very unclear what you mean when you talk about how the terminology was used at given points in time.

For instance, you mentioned your belief that Macdonald and Whigham routed the entire golf course of NGLA on horseback in a day or two prior to optioning a specific 205 acres in December 1906, yet various reports of that time state that their next step is to "lay out" the course, which they planned to do over the next several months, which would result in plasticene models of the specific holes that could be used to guide those building/constructing the course.  

What am I missing?

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

Are you stating that it is your belief that Campbell planned the course before he staked it out on the ground? If so, when did he do that and when did he then stake it out?

[Kevin Lynch]

Kevin
Note the title of the thread. There is no one still remaining on this thread who does not acknowledge Campbell laid out the course in 1894 and Campbell was the pro in 1896, accept you. And that ain't no theory; that is a fact.

Way to go. I'm not sure the purpose of your post other than to make us all question your intelligence, judgement and reading comprehension.

Wow!  I must be an idiot, because I was under the impression that Tom, Mike, Phil, Jeff & David still had some differences of opinion on the extent of Campbell's involvement.  I guess I'm too stupid to realize that everyone is in complete agreement what "laid out" means.  Of course, then I must be imagining the dozens of pages of debate on what it means (in various threads).

Nowhere did I give the impression that I denied Campbell's involvement.  And my quote about not being fully convinced of any theories includes the theory that Squire & Co did it all by themselves.  Is it possible that the members took a shot at the routing themselves before Campbell's arrival (at which point there may have been some minor or significant revisions?)  Could the omission of any mention of Campbell's involvement be related to prevailing attitudes towards pros in the early days (I seem to remember an article regarding a potential boycott of Myopia based on poor treatment in previous tournaments)?  Does the timing of the "Campbell did it all" theory cause any questions?   These aren't black & white "facts" that I fail to comprehend.  Rather, there are questions that are difficult to answer without considering what the Club's internal records show - whether they were lost, never existed, or were recollections of early members of the Club.  

Tom said he wanted this thread to shed some more light on Willie Campbell's contributions to early American GCA.  I think it was successful in that.  Tom is correct that it is a shame that there was no mention of his contributions in the Club History, IMO.



Unfortunately, the only "fact" that I'm convinced of through this thread is that some people don't do well in responding civilly to disagreement or questions.  I'm intentionally not naming names, but if you feel this was pointed at you, you may want to think about why that is.


Also, I think I'm convinced that aggressiveness isn't the best tactic when trying to persuade someone to your point of view.  Insulting people's intelligence probably isn't lifted from Dale Carnegie, either - except when you don't care if the person accepts your point of view.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kevin,

I once responded similarly, saying "Call me an idiot, but....."  Within minutes, about five posters wrote, "Jeff, you're an idiot!" but it was all in good fun.

What was the old Steve Martin joke about DC's seminar on how to win friends and influence people?  "Yeah, I took that class with some asshole!"

I can understand why TMac would want to have Willie Campbell's one (or ten) day contribution to the design of MH added to his credit list.  That said, it doesn't enhance WC's rep by much, given it was an improvised course, and despite his club connection, supposed fame, and later gca record, it was torn up and gone (largely) within a year or two.

WC was what he was to golf in America whether or not he designed the temporary nine at MH, right?

[Kevin Lynch]

David -

I seem to remember you chastising people for not speaking up regarding TEPaul's insulting behavior in other threads.  I thought you were correct and added my thoughts in attempt to have your work looked at without such boorish behavior.

Your silence on Tom's comment seems odd in light of this.  Is "insulting" behavior judged on a different standard when you agree with the person?

Don't worry - I'm not sitting here holding my breath until I'm apologized to, defended, or vindicated.  But I just thought you could use a moment to reflect on your past positions.

[Kevin Lynch]

Kevin,

I once responded similarly, saying "Call me an idiot, but....."  Within minutes, about five posters wrote, "Jeff, you're an idiot!" but it was all in good fun.

What was the old Steve Martin joke about DC's seminar on how to win friends and influence people?  "Yeah, I took that class with some asshole!"

I can understand why TMac would want to have Willie Campbell's one (or ten) day contribution to the design of MH added to his credit list.  That said, it doesn't enhance WC's rep by much, given it was an improvised course, and despite his club connection, supposed fame, and later gca record, it was torn up and gone (largely) within a year or two.

WC was what he was to golf in America whether or not he designed the temporary nine at MH, right?

Sorry Jeff, those comments fail the "reasoned and measured" test to be included in a forum like this (you used too much reason and constraint).   

Like I said earlier, it's been interesting to read about the early development of Golf here and getting to know more about the roles of the early Professionals.  My knowledge has been broadened - I don't need to come to an absolute black/white verdict to have received value from this topic (see, Jeff, it always comes back to the "black/white" paradigm we've been discussing). 

Now that I've got my feet wet on these debates, I think I'll do a search for the Joe Burbeck / Tillie thread on Bethpage to see what I can learn there (or did I just rip open a can of worms with that statement?)

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kevin,

Would you like ketchup with those worms?

[Mike Cirba]

See...this is why I get confused when we make blanket statements such as, paraphrased, "at that time, this is how "laid out" was used".

This article from January 1907 came after Macdonald and Whigham supposedly routed all of NGLA in a day or two on horseback, and then secured 205 acres of land.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()