Pine Valley history Book...

[Aaron]

Just wondering where you can purchase this and if anyone knows how much it is?

Aaron

[TEPaul]

You have to buy it through a member. Price=$100.00 + S&H= $7.00=$107.00

[Gene Greco]

There is "The Short History of Pine Valley " available on ebay as we type. This is a more collectible but less complete text. Hence, the name.

[Paul Turner]

Does Finegan's book have a copy of Harry Colt's famous drawings?

And sorry I can't help it, but Pine Valley is so exclusive that you need an introduction from a member to buy their book!  That's hilarious!

[Tim_Weiman]

Paul,

I haven't seen all of Colt's drawings, but can tell you that Jim Finegan does provide an example in the PV history.

By the way, the book really is a club history.  Anyone looking for a detailed examination of the golf course itself might be disappointed.

Actually, there are a number of club histories that are disappointing if what you really want is information (and pictures) of the golf course.

The Royal Melbourne history falls into that category.  The book is about the club, not Mackenzie's work. Paul Daley's upcoming book on the golf courses of the Sandbelt will probably be far more welcome to students of golf architecture than the Royal Melbourne history.

In fairness, I should point out that Jim Finegan did a wonderful job telling the PV history and presenting the role of key personalities in the club's history. Creating a great golf club is no easy task, so this is clearly a story worth telling.

[Aaron]

Tim,
Thank you very much. I am really looking for info on the course, although I am sure it would be a great read, that is not what I am looking for.

Aaron

[TEPaul]

Paul:

I don't know that selling the book that way means they're trying to be exclusive. They  probably want to be sure that their members get a shot at buying the book first--who  knows what the inventory is?

In answer to your question there is a photo in Finegan's book of the booklet Colt used for his hole drawings with one of the hole drawings (#17) in the photo. It was interesting to me that what Colt produced was just hole drawings and nothing in the way of a routing, as some believe.

It is also interesting to know how the holes of Pine Valley evolved. It seems that the routing (and the holes) of the front nine was probably done in Crump's mind and cleared and under construction early on,  before Colt arrived to consult with him for a couple of weeks in the spring of 1913.

Colt is given credit by everyone for recommending that #5 be extended up to the 6th tee site (where it is today) and also for the conception of #10! #18 was also built early and that 11 hole course is what opened for play in the fall of 1914. #11, #16, #17 were added in 1915-6 and that made for an interesting situation (with the particular routing of PVGC) where golfers could get in an 18 hole round by playing what is today 1-9, 11, 16-18, and replaying 1-4 and they were back at the clubhouse having played 18 holes.

But what really fascinates me is exactly what was going on and when in Crump's mind with holes 12-15. When he died suddenly in 1918 those holes had not been built although it appears that Crump had finally settled on their exact routing, progression and design and what they are today is what he'd settled on. After his death holes 12-15 (that he planned and designed) were constructed and completed under the Wilsons of Merion and James Govan (super of PVGC).

Finegan mentions that what finally settled those holes is when Crump settled on the present green site of #13, which sort of brought the whole 12-15 jigsaw puzzle into line, if you know what I mean! Finegan mentions that the decision of #13 greensite made #14 (which was planned as a 400yd par 4) turn into the 185yd downhill par 3 that it is today and the rest, #15, probably just fell into line as a "connection" to get back up to #16 tee (#16 was already built!).

Finegan mentions that if it hadn't been that way (#14 changing from a par 4 to a par 3) then Pine Valley wouldn't have had four par 3s!  And four par 3s of varying shot demands was what Crump originally wanted. In this context it should be remembered that Crump stated (wrote) in the very beginning that he wanted a very precise hole spacing and balance scheme as well as specific shot requirements for his course (and his holes).

What I've been thinking for a long time now is that Finegan and many others may be failing to appreciate exactly what an architect goes through trying to route a golf course (particularly when he wants to have a particular hole balance scheme).

Finegan and others might assume that Crump could have built whatever he wanted, whereever he wanted it, but that may not be the case when you consider the topography and the land involved (and particularly in that day when you didn't have D-8s).

I think the delay on holes 12-15 was probably no more than Crump having a hard time figuring out how to get exactly what he wanted out there on what is now 12-15 and probably how to make it all connect correctly! This is also the time that he and Govan hit upon the idea of the 8 acre lake which was at the time a massive bog. This is also the time that Crump started to overrun budget bigtime and the time he dipped bigtime into his own fortune. Finegan speculates that creating that lake and all the earthwork to go with it must have been very expensive!

Anyway, it's fascinating to me to try to imagine what may have been going through Crump's mind on that four hole stretch before he finally settled on the way it is today.

It is also interesting to speculate that Crump may have been the type of designer (particularly since this was his first and only effort and he spent so much time on site) that may have picked a spot to start and just started routing, probably clearing and even designing and constructing. This kind of modus operandi (without an entire and exact 18 hole design in mind) is a bit of presciption for getting stuck here and there as he seemed to with #5 (before Colt solved it) and as he likely did on the stretch of 12-15!

Another reason I say this is if you closely analyze the old aerials (the best one is p.66 in GeoffShac's "Golden Age...") you will find some very odd (and telling) clearing lines in that four hole stretch!! You can see clearing lines beyond the present #12 which means to me that one option for that hole was about a 400yd straight par 4.

Personally, I believe the more likely option that he had in mind was combining the land form that is now #12 and about the first 2/3 of #13 with the green site well out to the right and short of the present #13 greensite. This would have been #12 and a very long par 5!! Look at the clearing lines on the aerial that would have accomodated this hole! This would have taken care of his par 5 on the back side (he only wanted two par 5s on the course and two unreachables!)

Then you can see all the clearing to the left of #13 all the way down to the lake. This would have been #13 (or it could have gone farther down past where #14 green is now to near the railroad tracks.

But then where was the fourth par 3 going to be since he only had two holes to go? Look at that long rectangular clearing line just over the lake from #15 tee!! Going either down to the right to the lake or else from down across the lake back up could have been his option for the par 3 #14. And with one hole remaining #15 would have been a short to medium length par 4 going back up the hill to the present #15 green and connecting with what was built.

It's interesting stuff and we do know that when he settled on #13 greensite the whole jigsaw puzzle feel into place! We know when he settled on that greensite he backed up to set the tees correctly for that hole and that bacically set #12 (since #12 tee site was probably already set off of the already built #11 green). And then #14 became what it is now and #15 just connected back up to #16 tee.

Another reason this seems plausible is Simon Carr said that Crump just before he died had not quite figured out exactly how to design #15 and wasn't sure about it although the basic hole had to be about what it is for obvious reasons. This would make sense too  for a hole that connected what had already been done with a problem area (12-15). And is not uncommon for a "connecting" hole or the last piece in the jigsaw puzzle, ie; how do I make this last piece fit perfectly?!?

[TEPaul]

Just one additional reason I think the evolution of 12-15 is very interesting is again the remark by Carr that Crump had not completely settled on what to do with #15 before he died.

I believe the proximity of #15 (back) tee to #14 green (the back tee needs to be protected by netting in the trees) is the only routing or design glitch at Pine Valley! I believe had Crump lived he probably would have altered this somehow.

The club might even take into consideration  the fact that Crump wasn't settled on this hole (#15) and look for a reasonable way to correct that dangerous tee/green proximity! Simon Carr said; "...It was the last thing on which I talked with him before he died, and he had not decided what to do with it."

I hesitate to even imply any recommendations to a course like Pine Valley but it is something that I know has been dicussed by the club and some members from time to time. Possible options would be to obsolete the very back tee on #15 and turn it back into something like what it used to look like (a sandy partially treed small hillock) and either just go with the front tee boxes or add a back tee well to the right (and behind #14 green). Since #13 is apparently slated to have it's length increased by about 30 yards the use of the front tee box wouldn't detract that much from the total card yardage. It might even make #15 play a little more "gambling" for the really long hitters. And if they wanted to make a longer tee box behind #14 it would just require a bit of a longer walk to get back and around the lake--no real big deal! Apparently an  attractive and low bridge across the lake from the right is not a consideration. Personally I think a tee box to the right and behind #14 would be excellent as it would create a great angle for driving up into the left to right slope of that fairway!

[Aaron]

No wonder this course is number one. The stories alone make it interesting.

A question, does Pine Valley have a aurau about it more intense then Augusta?

Aaron

[TEPaul]

Aaron:

I'm not sure if you mean what I just wrote is an interesting story or aura or you're  referring to something else.

If your referring to what I just wrote about Crump's possible dilemma with 12-15, it's not a story at all, just my speculation about what a designer like Crump might have faced. There isn't anyone I'm aware of who has thought about this--although I did call Mayor Ott to tell him about those posts and discuss the possiblities with him. Mayor Ott is one I would call because he knows as much about Pine Valley as anyone and he is interested in that kind of thing.

Frankly, I can't even imagine why any member would be interested in that speculation since Pine Valley is the way it is and why would they be interested in the way it might have been before it was finished? But I know there are some on here who would probably be interested because most of us are crazy anyway.

As to an aura at Pine Valley, I wrote that post in the first place to disabuse Paul Turner from implying that Pine Valley was practicing some other form of exclusivity by selling their new Finegan club history only through club members.

You see, I don't really think that Pine Valley practices much of any kind of exclusivity. Obviously the #1 golf course in the world and one of the most famous can't exactly let anyone and everyone walk in off the street and play the course or the members would likely have to make tee times five years in advance. That is sort of common sense. But anyone who has been to Pine Valley will tell you that they are very accomodating and hospitable and all they really care about is that you respect and understand golf. As long as you respect those things I've never found them to care who else you might be.

The other aura of Pine Valley which is an undeniable fact is that they glorify their designer, George Crump. Some may question that or complain about how they do it, but I can tell you as best they understand it that is what they do and have always done!

And not to start another debating war about trees or whatever but that is about as different from Augusta National as night and day. Augusta might pay occasional lip service to MacKenzie and Jones but they have little understanding about their original designers' architectural intentions or the way they designed and intended that course to be, as far as I can see. The Masters Tournament or the annual "show" or spectacle is a reason they continue every year to make changes but a completely invalid architectural one, in my opinion!

[Aaron]

Paul,
I was mostly refering to the history of the club as being so amazing. But your post was very interesting.

I agree with you about the Augusta vs. Pine Valley. I read somewhere that nothing beats the feeling when having a chance to play Augusta. However, I thought to myslef that playing PV would be ten times by better.

If I may ask one things, what kind of changes has Tom Fazio implemented on the course. Are they really that good? Is he respecting Crump's original intent in the design?

Aaron

[Paul Turner]

Actually, I just bought "The Garden State Golf" magazine and it has an excerpt from Finegan's book, so perhaps one day it will be available for the public, like his Scottish and Irish books.

I found it very interesting that Finegen explicitly states that Colt's drawings were detailed specifics of each hole (bunker placement, green contour...) rather than a routing plan (although these are obviously connected).  And that Crump had drawn up the routing a couple of months prior to Harry's arrival.  This is the opposite of most previous documentation that credits Colt with the routing.  As Tom Paul states, the article also includes the suggestion (in Colt's book) of a long 14th which was abandoned since Crump would have insisted on 4 par 3s.  But it's likely that this would have gone against the grain for Colt too, since he was the master of the short hole and from my experience always included at least 4 par 3s in fact a couple of his best courses Swinley and Sunningdale New have 5 par 3s.

[TEPaul]

I'd love to get a look at those Colt hole drawings some day and really analyze them for their detail but certainly Jim Finegan has and has also gone over all the old material Pine Valley has--Jim Finegan is a very diligent researcher.

Jim Finegan also belongs to PV and knows the course extremely well so we should take his word for it when he says; 'There are some similarities between Colt's work (the hole drawings) and the final layout of the holes, but there are many differences.'

It seems that a number of people took credit for some or much of the design of Pine Valley. The inscription on the back of a photo of Chick Evans at Pine Valley is one example. which states; '...a course I helped design.' That's fairly amazing since he had never been there before that photo was taken after playing the original 14 holes.

George Crump, being the collaborator that he was, probably asked a lot of people for their opinions of things to do with design but it seems pretty clear that he was the "editor" of any and all opinion and called the shots without question.

There is one interesting design story in Finegan's book and elsewhere about the collaboration between Colt and Crump. Apparently Colt absolutely insisted that the site to place the 2nd green was lower and  to the left of where it is today--but Crump wanted it the way it is today and nixed Colt with a swift "No good!"

I can't imagine what Colt's version might have looked like but what Crump did is pretty damn good. #2 was apparently Crump's favorite hole on the course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Do you feel that today's green speeds, or anything at 9+ on the stimp, detracts from the second green and play to the second green at PV, certainly one of the great greens and green settings in golf ?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Good question and that's an excellent thread of yours elsewhere about the stimp at 9+. I plan to respond on that thread soon but my basic feeling is that each and every course has to analyze and determine what is the best speed for their particular greens.

The real danger of the green speed mentality (a particular high stimp number) is that it's meaningless, potentially dangerous and counterproductive to just strive for some high number just because some other course may be doing it. This is one of the concerns that Mike Rewinski has spoken about a lot on here. Each course needs to determine what the best speed is for them and in the process they should probably just forget about what the exact stimp number is for someone else's course or frankly even their own!

You ask specifically about Pine Valley at 9+. Although I really don't know that much about what a stimp reading really is on any particular course I play I have been told often that Pine Valley generally maintains speeds higher than that and in the Crump Cup their green speeds often rise sometimes quite dramatically from what they generally maintain. There have been some horror stories there in that vein like what happened in 1975!

Pine Valley at really high green speeds is doable though--very, very intense but doable!

Just as a relative measure you can relate to, last year at the National's Singles tournament (not this year but 2000) they told me what the stimp reading was but I really don't agree that they were as fast as they said they were. I forget what they said exactly whether it was 10 or 12 or whatever, but if those greens were at that reading then something like Oakmont or Seminole in the Coleman were about 15 or 17--that's how much faster they felt!

[Paul Turner]

The Finegan article finishes:

"There can be little question about how Colt himself viewed his role in the project.  In a piece on Sunningdale that he wrote for the October 1914 issue of Golfer's Magazine, he commented, "The only course in America that I have seen which resembles it [Sunningdale] in any way is the new course at Pine Valley, which I had the honour to lay out last year...""

Given Colt's notorious modesty, the statement shouldn't be taken lightly.

[BillV]

To answer Aaron's question about an aura at The Valley, I say this

I know of no club with more genuine hospitality than The Valley. Golf and only golf matters.

Search the archives for Tommy Naccarato's thread "A Pauper at Pine Valley".  It says it all.

[ForkaB]

So then.  We all agree that Pine Valley deserves to be in the top 30-40 or so of the Golf Magazine top 100 list alongside Sunningdale, but well below the great links courses of the world?  Or not?

[Aaron]

Do you guys believe PV should not be at the top?

Aaron

[TEPaul]

PaulT:

That is undeniably true that Colt was a modest and very proper gentleman and apparently never even presumed to be on a first name basis with Crump.

And I'm certain that what Colt wrote in Golfer's Illustrated in 1914 was probably his firm belief as well and as such should not be taken lightly.

However, he did write that in 1914 before Pine Valley was completed (and he apparently may never have returned) and that does not address the fact that what Pine Valley was  then and is today (and little changed from Crump's original) has only a few hole similarities to Colt's hole drawings but many differences, just as Finegan stated. And the routing attribution to Colt as far as I can see has never been established at all.

There is another very interesting fact in Finegan's book about Colt and Crump apparently from a knowledgeable member in the beginning. And that is that Crump may have payed Colt $10,000. which Finegan estimated to be about $170,000 in today's dollars. If that is true (and some dispute it) that would have been a lot of money to spend for an architect's advice that was not much followed.

I have heard, years ago, that Crump may have hired Colt for his name and reputation and may have ended up paying him for that if he didn't really follow his advice. We should remember that Pine Valley was a golf course that was eagerly anticipated and when Crump died in 1918 he had great resspect in the architectural community, but when he met with Colt early on (1913) he was just beginning and trying to garner interest and members and obviously had no way of knowing how the course would eventually be received.

So it is logical to assume that Crump might have hired Colt more for name recoginition than anything else. And there seems to be no escaping the fact that the holes of Pine Valley did not really turn out the way Colt drew them and that appears to be his primary contribution to the design of Pine Valley.

[Jason_Henham]

BillV,

Do you have a date on that 'Pauper at Pine Valley' thread by Tommy. I'm struggling to find it.

Thanks,

Jason

[T_MacWood]

Very interesting, trying to piece together the history of PV's design. I've always suspected that in the past PVGC has tried to protect Crump's ultimate credit for the course.

Tillinghast wrote: "In March, 1913, I published a full description of work already accomplished and described in detail the first four holes, which had been completed entirely to George Crump’s own plan and personally directed building, and also the plan of the first nine holes and the tenth and eighteenth, all of which remained as George determined with the exception of the ninth. In May it was announced that the British golf architect, H.S. Colt, was in Canada and that probably he would visit Pine Valley to collaborate in the final drafting of plans, which he did during the following month, June, and most excellently."

Colt's biography states he made two trips to North America and PV, 1911/12 and 1913/14. Was Colt's involvement begin in 1913 or was he involved earlier on, either in person or from a far?

Later Tillinghast wrote in December 1914: "Much has been written concerning this marvelously fine course, discovered by that celebrated golf architect, Mr. H.S. Colt, but for the most part, players are familiar only with the eleven holes which are now being used. A fortnight ago the writer had the pleasure of walking over the undeveloped seven holes, and in his opinion they are the greatest of any, and Mr. Crump agrees with me in this opinion. At present the fairway is littered with uprooted stumps and underbrush, but the work of development is being pushed, and without a doubt the club will be playing on the entire course at this time next year."

In all the photos of PVGC within George Thomas's book he gives credit to "Crump and Colt".

It would reasonable to conclude Tillinghast and Thomas were among those most familar with the development of PVGC -- both as friends and accomplished architects in their own right.

Again according to Colt's biography following's Crump's death Colt was called in again and he dispatched CH Alison (1919?).

When Colt died in 1951, Alison was living in South Africa. He was evidently asked by the family if there was anything of Harry's that he might like to have. He wrote to his other partner John Morrison: "I've told them I want those Pine Valley photos. That is if you haven't got them."

[Paul Turner]

I hope Tom Doak sees this thread and posts.  He posted on a thread some time ago that he had seen Colt's book; probably the only person here that has.  And I didn't get the impression from his comments then, that Colt's drawings only had a passing resemblance to the finished course.

It would have been great if Finegan's book had included those Colt drawings; then we could have decided for ourselves.  

[Paul Turner]

Tom M

That's very interesting that Colt could have visited PV at an earlier date in 1911/12.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW and PaulT:

It is highly unlikely that Colt visited Pine Valley in 1911-1912 as Crump did not purchase the property that was to be Pine Valley from Sumner Ireland until October 1912.

Also the site plan (routing plan) that Crump devised (March 1913) prior to Colt's visit in May-June 1913 is remarkably similar to the golf course that is Pine Valley.

Jim Finegan has doubtlessly been through most all the material and records that exist today including Colt's 18 hole drawings. His conclusion is that there are some similarities but many differences and he also concludes that Colt may have advised Crump on some archtitectural theory and probably the exact placement of tees, green sizes and possibly some bunker schemes. He also reports that some of Colts hole drawings include none of the forced carries that were and are part of Pine Valley.

Due to these apparently accurate timelines it seems that Colt's contribution to Pine Valley was likely exactly as Finegan reports.