Pls help me understand

[Ted Kramer]

This post is 100% honest and not meant to be one bit sarcastic.

I'm new to this site. While I have been interested in golf course architecture for years, I have never formally studied it, nor have I had a group of people with whom to discuss my interest.

I recently joined a golf club in South Jersey called Pine Hill. The course basically got bashed on this site a few times, I did a search and read a bunch of comments. I'm not trying to defend the course or Fazio one bit. That is not the point of this post at all.

I really want to try to understand what it is about Fazio and or Pine Hill specifically that a number of you guys can't stand. I'm choosing Pine Hill only because I've played the course enough times to have a basis for comparison and hopefully be able to understand and recognize some the issues that guys point out.

Maybe this will help too . . .again, not in an effort to defend, but here is a list of some of the things about the course that I do and do not like:

Like:
-mix of uphill and downhill tee shots
-mix of uphill and downhill approaches
-plenty of par4's that don't require driver (thought is involved)
-par 3's from 160-210 in length, not too short not too long
-Very scenic (views of Philly skyline from a few tees)
-Chances to bounce the ball into some greens
-skyline green on 9 and 18 (i like that look)

Don't Like:
-long walks from green to next tee (not set-up with the walker in mind, I walk, and its not easy)
-lots of bunkers, a few too many if you ask me
-not much risk reward

Feel free to bash the place if you hate it. Please just be specific so I can maybe learn something, I wont be offended. And just for the record, I really like the course a lot, so you can bash me too, but please give me some specifics.

Thanks,
Ted

[Bob_Huntley]

Ted,

Congratulations on presenting a simple question requiring specific answers.

Some of the carping of the works of specific architects discussed on this site, border on the absurd.

[Brent Hutto]

As a fellow newbie to this forum I've often been tempted to ask the same sort of question. I'm apparently built too low to the ground because a lot of this stuff goes right over my head.

You make Pine Hill sound pretty nice. Be careful or Tom Huckaby might just happen to have a business meeting in your town one day.

[THuckaby2]

As a fellow newbie to this forum I've often been tempted to ask the same sort of question. I'm apparently built too low to the ground because a lot of this stuff goes right over my head.

You make Pine Hill sound pretty nice. Be careful or Tom Huckaby might just happen to have a business meeting in your town one day.

 
Brent, let's just say that the original post here - and yours - are duly noted.

 

TH

[Ted Kramer]

As a fellow newbie to this forum I've often been tempted to ask the same sort of question. I'm apparently built too low to the ground because a lot of this stuff goes right over my head.

You make Pine Hill sound pretty nice. Be careful or Tom Huckaby might just happen to have a business meeting in your town one day.

I'd be happy to host anyone at Pine Hill anytime, I play year round if the course is open.

To be honest, its not even private yet, so you don't need a host, but its a lot less expensive if you play with a member, and the morning times are reserved for members and their guests.

-Ted

[THuckaby2]

As a fellow newbie to this forum I've often been tempted to ask the same sort of question. I'm apparently built too low to the ground because a lot of this stuff goes right over my head.

You make Pine Hill sound pretty nice. Be careful or Tom Huckaby might just happen to have a business meeting in your town one day.

I'd be happy to host anyone at Pine Hill anytime, I play year round if the course is open.

To be honest, its not even private yet, so you don't need a host, but its a lot less expensive if you play with a member, and the morning times are reserved for members and their guests.

-Ted

Ted - you're a good egg to offer that - but please understand this was just Brent giving me a hard time, and me acknowledging such.  I do tend to get around.  But I live in CA, so you're safe from me.  For now.  

[Ted Kramer]

I have certainly "Bashed" Pine Hill, if you will.

My knocks on Fazio and on Pine Hill

Pine Hill
Not walkable unless you really really want to
Too much emphasis on aethetics for aesthetics sake
Little if any strategy but lots of visual hystrionics
A pretty damned boring set of greens
The proximity to and the utter lack of failure to emulate Pine Valley (Marketing crap-ola)


Fazio (Group)
Poor router of golf courses
Too much emphasis on aesthetics instead of strategy
Dismissal of "Classic Architecture" and Architects
Touts their courses as "Top 100 or Top 20 Courses" when clearly not the case
I once summarized a course of theirs as "Full of what passes for character instead of true character".

Would I play Pine Hill again?  Absolutely.  It is still better than most average courses.

How many times have you played it?
Do you remember any of the holes specifically?
I'm just curious becasue I thinkt that their is plenty of strategy involved on a bunch of holes and I'd like to discuss my opnions with you if you remember the course well enough.

And you're right about the greens, not the greatest.

-Ted

[Mike_Cirba]

I'd only add to redanman's comments a few additional thoughts.

1) Pine Hill seems to be generally liked by many as is evidenced by it's rating in Golf Magazine's Top 100 You can Play.  Then again, Lighthouse Sound is in there so you can make of that list what you will.

2) The focus on aesthetics is such that you play downhill with the Philly skyline on one par four, only then trudge straight back up the same hill to view it again on the subsequent par three teeshot.  

3) I like the skyline greens quite a bit, and there are at least 4 or 5 holes I really liked at Pine Hill, even if the 1st green is the only one I saw with any internal contour or character.

4) The marketing of Pine Hill that compared it to Pine Valley is silly, so some of the comments here were against that hopeless backdrop.  

5) It's a pretty good property, but the routing that focuses more on aesthetics than walkable intimacy fails to take advantage of it to a great degree.

6) It's a good public course, but priced ridiculously high.    

[JakaB]

6) It's a good public course, but priced ridiculously high.    

Ted,

Don't ever feel like you overpaid for your membership when the people who say it is overpriced didn't pay a dime to play...In the interest of full disclosure Mike played for free so he should not comment on price structure....architecture he knows but why price is a factor is lost on me...

[cary lichtenstein]

Ted:

I liked Pine Hill quite a bit when I played it and you will find a few of my posts to that effect.

You just have to understand where alot of these guys are comming from:

1) They hate cart golf
2) They believe that routing that forces you to walk or ride uphill for the next tee shot is poor routing
3) They don't like drop shots

Take what they say with a grain of salt, and form our own opinions.

[Ted Kramer]

I'd only add to redanman's comments a few additional thoughts.

1) Pine Hill seems to be generally liked by many as is evidenced by it's rating in Golf Magazine's Top 100 You can Play.  Then again, Lighthouse Sound is in there so you can make of that list what you will.

***Fair enough

2) The focus on aesthetics is such that you play downhill with the Philly skyline on one par four, only then trudge straight back up the same hill to view it again on the subsequent par three teeshot.  

*** Which 2 holes? I only think of 3 and 13 as having the skyline view. Maybe I'm not thinking clearly.

3) I like the skyline greens quite a bit, and there are at least 4 or 5 holes I really liked at Pine Hill, even if the 1st green is the only one I saw with any internal contour or character.

***Internal contours on the greens are not great, #16 happens to be pretty good too.

4) The marketing of Pine Hill that compared it to Pine Valley is silly, so some of the comments here were against that hopeless backdrop.  

***Fair enough

5) It's a pretty good property, but the routing that focuses more on aesthetics than walkable intimacy fails to take advantage of it to a great degree.

*** I'm pretty sure that environmental issues had a lot more to do with that than any focus on asthetics. There is a stream on the property that had to be avoided - 4, 5, 6, 7 are VERY spreadout to accomodate that stream. I wish the holes were a little closer together, but I don't think they had a choice.

6) It's a good public course, but priced ridiculously high.    

***Fair enough

Thanks,
Ted

[Brent Hutto]

2) They believe that routing that forces you to walk or ride uphill for the next tee shot is poor routing

OK, on the too-few Ross courses I've played the more or less cliche layout is downhill tee shot and then back uphill to the green. Given a hilly piece of property, in what order are the following uses of the hills considered desirable:

1) Downhill tee shot, uphill approach
2) Uphill tee shot to a ridge, downhill approach
3) Play one hole along the ridge line and another along the valley
4) Play holes along the sideslopes
5) Cut diagonally with shots being neither up/down or along a ridge/valley

Second question. If you want a downhill tee shot for whatever reason, is it better to have the player play back up the hill to get to the green versus staying low for the green and then walking/carting uphill to the next tee?

[Ted Kramer]

6) It's a good public course, but priced ridiculously high.    

Ted,

Don't ever feel like you overpaid for your membership when the people who say it is overpriced didn't pay a dime to play...In the interest of full disclosure Mike played for free so he should not comment on price structure....architecture he knows but why price is a factor is lost on me...

The daily fee price is high, but I don't think that he was refering to the price of memebrship. . .it would be tough to call the price to join Pine Hill "Ridiculously High", that couldn't be what he meant.

But I agree, I have no idea what price has anything to do with the architecture. . . .

-Ted

[Andy Hughes]

But I live in CA, so you're safe from me.  For now.  

Hmm, can someone remind me how much further NJ is from CA than Westchester is from CA?  
Ted, don't let 'em fool you, you're not so safe!

[JakaB]

Ted,

Considering you are a member...do you think the daily fee price is high....do you have a problem with unaccompanied people paying more than your guests...

[cary lichtenstein]

Take Jupiter Hills, for example. Their 18th hole, which is from an elevated tee to an elevelated green, and your 2nd shot off a downhill lie. Is that a good hole?

[Ted Kramer]

Ted,

Considering you are a member...do you think the daily fee price is high....do you have a problem with unaccompanied people paying more than your guests...

The fact my guests can play for less money than Joe Public does not bother me in the least. Should it? Is there something that I am not considering?

-Ted

[THuckaby2]

But I live in CA, so you're safe from me.  For now.  

Hmm, can someone remind me how much further NJ is from CA than Westchester is from CA?  
Ted, don't let 'em fool you, you're not so safe!

Good catch Andy.  That's why I added the "for now."

 

[Jason Mandel]

for full disclosure Pine Hill started out as a entirely public course , hence the "Public Pine Valley" marketing gimick.  They have now decided in order to be profitable to turn the place private once they sell the requisite memberships.

i have not played the course but i have spoke to others who have.  my dad who walks about 25% of the time played the course  riding and absolutely loved it.  i also spoke to a few who played in a us open or am qualifier or something like that and being forced to walk that place is really an injustice.  its just that unwalkable from what i have heard.  fazio's name in the delaware valley is actually pretty good.  galloway is a strong course and some of the older stuff he did with his uncle is good, especially the greens at waynesborough and squires.  

jason

[Andy Hughes]

Good catch Andy.  That's why I added the "for now."

Good point Tom. I should be more appreciative of nuance.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jason;

I agree that despite an awkward routing, Galloway is superb.

[JakaB]

Ted,

You are not missing a thing...again in full disclosure...I am a member of a Fazio course that can only be said has been met with praise by the people on this site....but I am seen as an anti-Fazio basher.   So take my comments with a grain of salt...but...I hate unaccompanied play unless I am the unaccompanied....I think if it costs a foresome appoximately twice the monthly dues of a member for one round you have it about right..

[Jason Mandel]

the place that i was at that really got to me about Fazio was Caves Valley.  I didn't play the course so i didn't experience the fabulous clubhouse, food, service, etc.  i just saw the golf course because my brother was a caddy there and caddied in the us senior open.   for a course that is mandatory walking unless you can get a good dr. to vouch for you that is one of the toughest places i have ever walked.

it also looked like he showed no regard for the land and just shaped the hell out of the place.  for a place that wanted their course to be mandatory walking, it was almost as if he showed no regard for it in the routing.  they even had to take carts for a couple of the green to tee walks.


jason

[Ted Kramer]

Come on guys . . .
this is a hanging curve, right over the middle.

I thought you would all be replying so fast I wouldn't be able to keep up with all the new posts.

-Ted

[THuckaby2]

Come on guys . . .
this is a hanging curve, right over the middle.

I thought you would all be replying so fast I wouldn't be able to keep up with all the new posts.

-Ted

Ted - I don't think many beyond the Philadelphia contingent plus Matt Ward have played your course... thus the lack of replies so far.  But hang in there, once more see this I'm sure there will be quite a response... Pine Hill has elicited such before...

TH