[Tony Ristola]

TEPaul:  Here is a course which has hosted 2 US Opens in the last 15 years...the most recent only six years ago. What "design elements need dusting off"? I had never heard about Shinnecock being in less than excellent condition.  Has it been overwatered, over-fertilized ("Birkdalized"), and narrowed in these six years.  Is it a noticeably different golf course today, or is it cosmetically different?

Mike:  Are you trying to infer Shinnecock hasd bumpy greens, and there's not enough sand in the bunkers?  Don't tell me the members are hitting the "firewater bottles" in the bunkers again!  

Was Shinnecock's course in sub-par condition for the 95 US Open?  I watched the 3rd and 4th rounds tapes not 10 months ago and it looked fine to me. The course should have been at the top of its game then... it was their second National Open in ten years.  What can they possibly do to make it number one if it couldn't succeed when it had the international spotlight, and surely unlimited funds and manpower?

An interesting note... someone I know played the US Open that year (95) and said the greens were ridiculously fast.  The guy is no journeyman pro.  

By your definition Pebble gets a "special exemption" in the conditioning equation... which I believe is a trivial part of the equation as most courses at this level are well conditioned.  

Does Bethpage Black get special consideration?  St. Andrews Old?  Yale?

Did Merion drop like a lead balloon after it lost much of the grass on its greens years ago?  No, it got special consideration.  Shouldn't the architecture of all courses should get special consideration?   If the architecture is great, and the course is in "membership condition" instead of "championship condition", that should be taken into account.  You're rating the architecture... not the conditioning...or?
How much more will you give a course which is rated in "championship" vs. "membership" condition?

   

 

[TEPaul]

Tony:

Frankly, I'm not speaking of rating Shinnecock at all-just asking some quesions of MikeR after his recent visit to Shinnecock.

It seems from Mike's (who knows the course very well) post that Michaud is taking the course to a higher level, whether that involves just conditioning and maintenance or some design tweaking.

Some of Mike's remarks should answer your questions. Whatever they're doing design-wise is probably minimal and just in the tweaking area. I do believe that trees have been cleared back some from the pervious Open, particularly #14. As for whatever else they plan to do in design and maintenance MikeR could tell you better than me.

As to what exactly gets a course into the #1 position in the World in the rating game-well, I don't think I want to get into that! But it appears from recent experience that obviously a US Open doesn't hurt!

If Shinnecock becomes #1 in the next several years, it wouldn't suprise me and I believe I would concur--it's a helluva golf course architecture-wise and now apparently conditioning-wise.

[Tony Ristola]

TEPaul:  Again, it seems to me nothing is really changing with the golf course, it's just going to be or is better maintained, and some areas overtaken by bush are being restored to grassland... restoring contour.
 
That the architecture of Shinnecock deserves to be number one is a different story, it has do do with the merit of the design... but achieving number one through better maintenance...?  

"... the big story is the general condition of the course,..."
Mike Rewinski

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tony,

Previous to the first of the recent two Opens, Shinnecock suffered from neglect in the maintainance area.

Clover was on the green surfaces, the underbrush had been allowed to grow unabated throughout the rough, etc., etc..

Your point is valid, but sometimes, other negative features detract from ones perspective on the architectual merits of the golf course.  Yale would be a similar example.

Sometimes when we get out of bed in the morning, after a wild night, we don't look so good, at least our beauty isn't obvious.
But, with a shower, proper grooming, and some nice clothes, we are perceived as a different, glamorous person, and I think this applies to Shinnecock.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong

[Jim Sullivan]

TEPaul
      Played SH June 8 & 9 also and cna confirm the outstanding job the new super is doing. In addition to significant clearing of background underbrush opening up more and more new views, the course is re-routing the sand cart tracks to (further) minimize their impact.

[Jim Sullivan]

TEPaul
      My enduring concern at SH is the quality of the fairways. I'm prejudiced against the playability of rye fairways for top flight golf, and I believe SH is a mix of rye and poa with some small percent of bent. To me the best surfaces are primarily laterally aggressive creeping bent. I wonder why such great bent greens need to coexist with middling fairways.
      Also I wonder about the fairway striping. With the grain you get a different shot value than against it - and they don't vary the cutting pattern!

[Josh_Mahar]

Jim S:  I don't know why you are prejudiced against rye fairways.  They can play as well as bent and I would say generally play firmer than most bentgrass.  Also when I was out there last year I didn't see that much bentgrass on the greens--over half was poa and very nice poa at that.  I would agree with everyone else that has played SH recently that it is playing well and looked like it was definitely readying itself for the Open.  

[TEPaul]

Jim Sullivan:

Is this the Jim Sullivan, my buddy from HVGC, the second coming of Linc Roden III, Green Committee Chairman extraordinaire?

If this is the same Jim Sullivan, fellow GCAers, this was a Green Committee Chairman that should be studied by green committee chairmen of the future. Open minded, great learning curve, figured out from his mentor what the total package of really good orginal design and maintenance practices are all about vs. modern age concept transplants, sold the membership on the proper direction and the commonsense logic of how good it could be for them etc, etc--need I  go on?

Anyway, I don't really know much about agronomy! I'm about a 20 handicapper on agronomy, but it's definitely next on my list of learning. For a comment on the fairways of SH, I'd love to hear from the likes of Mike Rewinski or some of the other old line East-Enders-they're kind of all family out there, you know.

[GeoffreyC]

Jim Sullivan -

good to see that you are checking out the GCA.  Your comments and insights are very welcome here.

[Tom_Doak]

Jim Sullivan!  Long time, no see ...

Ran:  your assumptions about Shinnecock's voting record in the GOLF balloting is quite wrong.  Even Pine Valley doesn't get all A's, and every other course has at least five detractors.  In fact, there are very few courses which are unanimously in the top 50!

Of course I have not seen the last two sets of ballots, but I'd be surprised if it has changed.

[Mike_Rewinski]

When I played Shinnecock in the fall with Mark Fine I bladed two bunker shots over the green because there was no sand and I hit the loam bottom. There were also 'speed bumps' where the sand had built up at the trap machine exits. Enough said!

Personally I prefer rye-poa fairways (although gray leafspot may change that), the only advantage that bent has is a larger safety margin when you dry it out. Bentgrass has a soft blade and needs to be cut very low to give good lies. Rye-poa has a stiffer blade so the ball sits up better. Rye and poa aren't creeping grasses so they don't thatch up, this compensates somewhat for the fact that the poa will go into drought stress if pushed too far.

[Joel_Stewart]

A few pictures from just this last month:



\

[Joel_Stewart]

 

[Helper]

 

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Thanks Mr. Helper,

My mind completely forgot the http://

You forgot one though!

[T_MacWood]

I'm not a big fan of that mowing pattern. There is something very strange about the look of the 16th and 14th -- two extremely natural holes look unnatural in those photos.

[TEPaul]

I like the old fashioned up and back fairway mowing pattern that Shinnecock is using again and that Salem used in the recent Senior Open.

It can be off-putting for some golfers as it seems to divide fairways in half and probably throws some golfers off pyshologically. You should see this look on holes like #9 and #18 Shinnecock and how that pattern looks rolling over those extremely topographical fairways!! If they start thinking about things like trying to hit the light side for more roll and missing the dark side so as not to slow the ball down, well then, they are really starting to outthink themselves and the designer or at least the "maintenance meld" has definitely gotten too far into their head--not a bad thing at all!

Tom MacW:

Whether or not you or any of us like this up and back mowing pattern I think it would be hard to say that it looks modern. It shows up on almost all the old aerials of the old classic courses since it was just the fairway cutting pattern of the enormous old gang mowers used back then. Why did they do it that way back then? It was probably just a practical function of turning the mowers without having to turn out into the rough areas and screwing them up. I was told yesterday by the super at one of America's oldest courses (who likes the up and back) that even with today's much smaller equipment it's easier on the rough areas to turn the equipment with this style!

[Joel_Stewart]

The pictures are a little out of sinc.  The 2nd picture was taken last month and the last picture was taken in August 1999, both of the 11th hole.  Just by comparing these 2, you can see the difference in conditioning.  
The 1st photo is the 10th hole and you can see the condition of the rough.  Amazingly, this individual made a rare par on the hole.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joel,

Thanks for sharing the pics.  It looks to be in fine condition, although I would concur with Tom MacWood that I'm also not a big fan of the two-shaded fairway, either here or at Salem.  

Also, if I recall correctly, wasn't 1999 the year of the very lengthy drought in the northeast?  From the courses I played that summer, I'm frankly surprised to see any green colors at all in the last picture.  I also think it is probably therefore an unfair comparison between the work of the former and current Superintendents to view it based on the pictures alone.  

[Joel_Stewart]

Mike:
I don't recall if 1999 had a drought but I do know that the end of Long Island has had alot of rain this year and its been reasonibly mild.  As a result, the course is amazingly lush.  

You can also notice the difference in #10 with the first and third pictures.  The first picture shows how green and lush the rough is.

As for the change in supers, it is my understanding that this is the first time in the history of Shinnecock that they have brought in someone from the outside.  To compare different supers would be unfair. I think what Michaud has done is bring in some new ideas, instead of carrying on the same old routine.  Furthermore as fresh new eyes he's seeing areas that need restoration or just plain old water and fertilizer.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Joel;

I see your point.  I also wonder if I might like a drought-stricken Shinnecock a bit better than a lush one.  I have a thing for multiple colors and contrasts, but that's a personal preference.

Thanks for the detailed explanation.

[Cory W]

For all out beauty, Sand Hills, in my opinion beats Shinnecock.  Now, I have not seen Shinnecock in person, and like I said, this is my opinion, but Sand Hills is more natural and less man-made, natural looking.  Does that make any sense?  It looks to me like they should let Shinnecock go even a little more natural.  Somebody made a comment about the mowing patterns earlier.  I agree.  The mowing patters make it look un-natural.  I have played Sand Hills a few times and would have trouble believing that there is anything in the U.S.  that is as close to pure golf as the Sand Hills.  One of a kind.  Give Sand Hills another 10 years, and it might be ranked in the top 10 in america.  

[Matt_Ward]

Cory W: Quick question?

How do you rate Sand Hills above Shinnecock Hills when you have NEVER been on the grounds at Shinnecock???

While everyone can have an opinion I would hope opinions are offered with a degree of knowledge. Assessing the character of a course from simply observing photographs is really a stretch.

I too am a big fan of Sand Hills (played it in 1997) and believe the potential for the course to elevate itself is clearly there.

[LenBum]

Cory,

You asked if what you said made sense. No it does not. The Shinnecock Hills course being played today was done in 1930, a few of the holes designed years earlier by Seth Raynor. I realize you didn't say Shinnecock Hills looked man made , just that Sand Hills looked more natural. The only hole that looks created might be the 7th hole, Redan. And this is one of the holes done by Seth Raynor. Step to the tee at the 14th and tell me it's not one of the most natural looking holes you've ever seen. Besides, I'm going to guess that there wasn't a whole lot of land moving back in the 1920's when the course was being redone.In all the years I've worked there I've never heard the words "Man Made" uttered. It would be a crime!

[LenBum]

Cory,

In regard to your comment about the fairway mowing pattern, what pattern would look natural? Also,I'm not sure choosing a mowing pattern is done strickly on how it will look. There are probably other considerations such as fairway bunkering, the irrigation system , ect.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()