Pls help me understand

[Ted Kramer]

After reading a bunch of posts and opinions on this site during the past few weeks/months it surprises me an awful lot that the pic posted from Twisted Dune would be used to convey "GCA.com ideals and prefferences" as it relates to gca while the pics of Pine Hill are used as examples of lesser design and kind of "what not to do".

Do a few pics tell the whole story . . .absolutley not and I understand that, but I think my point is clear.

-Ted

[Andy Hughes]

Brian, got it, thanks.  The fine details of gca sometimes escape me. I do at times have to remember that hairy is a good thing.
I checked out the site and their hole-by-hole pics--cool looking course.

[Ted Kramer]

Damn MikeC, this pic of Twisted Dune looks awfully Rees-ish, what with the mounding running down the length of the hole on both sides and all  

Andy,

That back bunker is great because it's hairy.  There's a fine line between hairy and round, and just round.  

  - ahh yes, the hairy factor.
how could I have forgotten?

Matt, many valid points, and like I said, I have some work to do on my end in playing some more courses around here.

But don't insult me and say that my opinons have anything to do with a vested interest in the place because I'm a member. I chose to become a member because I liked the course. The membership wasn't given to me, I chose it because of the reasons that I am giving, I'm not giving the reasons and citing examples because I'm a member.

-Ted

[Brian_Gracely]

Andy,

So ignoring the lack of back, round bunkers in this picture, is this a good hole or bad?  Seems like the hole is build between containment mounds (that have probably been there 500yrs)



People on GCA always like to goof on the modern guys because they don't build things like the old courses, but I tend to disagree in most cases.  The probably is not trying to reuse those same principles, the issue is usually in the last 5-10% that doesn't do a very good job of making it tie in very well.

[Matt_Ward]

Ted:

There's no insult -- it's simply fact.

You're a member -- you have a conflict of interest because you're tied to the club. End of story. People who pay money to belong to a club will side with the club because of their connection to it -- it's like parents defending their kids. There's nothing wrong with doing so, but clearly the preference of your positions is going to be slanted that way.

Let me also mention the two-word phrase you tilted (no pun intended!) --"empty vessel." I give credit to Pine Hill for a number of things -- I believe my sense of the course is fair and balanced. You need to realize that the TF design motif is alive and well at Pine Hill. For some -- maybe you -- that's fine and dandy. If and when you play a wide variety of other TF designed layouts you will see certain instances of what he does and frankly with few exceptions -- these elements have often been overplayed from a "scenic" component to the detriment of on-course strategic considerations. The greens at Pine Hill -- again with a few exceptions -- are not tied to the strategic implications from a range of angles. Sure, the course does offer a good deal but it's the detailing for me -- when based against other TF courses I've played and against the elite of Jersey public golf -- that makes me feel the way I do about the course.

[Andy Hughes]

Brian
I'm not sure I could really comment on the the merits of the hole, as all I know of it is this one pic. But I can say it appeals to me because:
1. I like the open, 'vastness' feeling it conveys
2. It looks oh so linksy, firm and bouncy
3. The land appears to be well-rippled
4. Its unusual looking
5. I can picture hitting a shot that lands short/left that scampers on and takes the contour
6. Its golf, and I am one of those freaks who happens to like, at one level or another, almost any course I have ever played.
I tend to agree with you re modern courses--but my complaint tends to be that too many that I have seen are dullish, devoid of real interest.  

[Tony Petersen]

  I can only imagine that bashing that will (or has) taken place when the enlightened GCA'ers have the chance to play The Maroon Creek Club outside of Aspen, CO... Though you have to admit the policy of no cell phones at the club is a GREAT idea!!!

[Ted Kramer]

Ted:

There's no insult -- it's simply fact.

You're a member -- you have a conflict of interest because you're tied to the club. End of story. People who pay money to belong to a club will side with the club because of their connection to it -- it's like parents defending their kids. There's nothing wrong with doing so, but clearly the preference of your positions is going to be slanted that way.

Let me also mention the two-word phrase you tilted (no pun intended!) --"empty vessel." I give credit to Pine Hill for a number of things -- I believe my sense of the course is fair and balanced. You need to realize that the TF design motif is alive and well at Pine Hill. For some -- maybe you -- that's fine and dandy. If and when you play a wide variety of other TF designed layouts you will see certain instances of what he does and frankly with few exceptions -- these elements have often been overplayed from a "scenic" component to the detriment of on-course strategic considerations. The greens at Pine Hill -- again with a few exceptions -- are not tied to the strategic implications from a range of angles. Sure, the course does offer a good deal but it's the detailing for me -- when based against other TF courses I've played and against the elite of Jersey public golf -- that makes me feel the way I do about the course.

Belonging to the club has nothing to do with it . . .
The holes are too far appart in places, there is not a good amount of risk/reward, the course doesn't always plays fast and firm enough, their are too many bunkers in some places . . .I belong to the club, yet I can recognize and have no problem talking about these aspects which I find to be negative.

I tell it like it is. I said what I said about the greens at PH because I believe that what I said is true, not because I belong to the club.

I would like to have the opportunity to continue this conversation with you over a drink in the Pine Hill club house one day after 18 holes . . .

-Ted

[Dave_Miller]

 

 

 
 

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.  

That didn't stop you from getting to Boston and Charles River
Best,
Dave

[THuckaby2]

Dave - oh absolutely, and one of the great golf days of my life that was - just do note the "for now."

No one is truly safe from me forever.

 

[John_Cullum]

lets see if I can pull this off

[John_Cullum]

Lets try again:

[Ted Kramer]

one more try??
[img}   before the url and  [/img}   after.


-Ted

[John_Cullum]

last try

"

[Ted Kramer]

email me the pic at
tkram625@foxtv.com

-Ted

[Gary_Nelson]

Ted,

Keep up the good work.  This thread is my favorite one this year.  Seven pages of posts and not ONE reference to NGLA.  It's hard to believe.  I love it!

I'd like to know specifically what the group thinks should be done to the greens to make them "better"?  More bumpy?  More lumpy?  More hairy?  Runoffs to collection/chipping areas?

The routing is done and the land seems to be universally praised.  All that's left to "fix" are greens and bunkers.  Are they really that blah?

Gary

[THuckaby2]

You know what's a great course that Pine Hill would do well to emulate?

The National Golf Links of America.

TH

 

ps, sorry Gary, couldn't resist.

[Mike_Cirba]

Dave;

That's crap!

World Woods Pine Barrens is a great course.

Galloway National is a superb course, even with a screwy routing.  

Matt has listed many Fazio courses (some of which aren't ranked) that he holds in very high regard.

Heck, I even brought up Oyster Bay in LI as a very good early Fazio course on very limited property that never is discussed here.

This bias thing is bullshit.

[Gary_Nelson]

Tom,
Thanks for adding the NGLA reference.

Dave,
I share your curiosity.  I sure would like to know what the heck "tieing in the greens and bunker complexes" really means.  Is it just a maintenance issue and letting the bunker surrounds get "hairy"?  Is it a lack of dips/bumps/swales on the green that are set up to maximize those "strategic choices"... which become irrelevant to those big hitters who hit it high and stop it fast?

While on my soapbox... allow me to continue.

We've concluded that shotmaking ability is gone and distances are up with high-tech clubs/balls.  What's left?  Trees and bunkers.  Ted Kramer put in an example at Pine Hill (hole #12).  Hit the ball long and left and you are OK. Hit it right and get blocked by a tree... or try to cut it around the tree on your approach if you can still do it with cavity back clubs.  The GCA.com reply was that the hole lacked strategy.  WTF?    How many choices do we need?  Just execute the shot or get better at your recovery shots.  

I'm of the opinion that a well-placed tree right in the middle of the fairway is a good thing.  Maybe that discussion should have it's own thread.

[Andy Hughes]

I'm of the opinion that a well-placed tree right in the middle of the fairway is a good thing.  Maybe that discussion should have it's own thread.

Gary, come one down, 'cause that subject just sprang up in the 'Hole Isolation' thread.

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm not a racist because I have 3 black friends.....

Dave;

The courses I mentioned were my favorites among what I've played of Tom Fazio.

I've played 11 of his original designs, 9 he did with his uncle George, and 5 where he had a hand in revisions to existing courses.  

What are you basing your assessment of his work on?

[Matt_Ward]

This is an amusing thread -- I now find myself on the side of being a Tom Fazio basher. Where is The Emperor when you really need him?

I'll say this again for the deaf and dumb types who can't figure out English -- I like Pine Hill -- I believe it's one of the ten best public courses in the Garden State. I also believe the site is one of the best around -- especially for South Jersey which can be as bland as it gets.

However ...

The details of the greens is just not there. Yes, there are a few spot examples. But, take Pine Hill and match it up with any of the better NJ public courses (I mentioned Ballyowen, Twisted Dune and Hawk Pointe, to name just three examples) and you can plainly see what's been included by the design team minus what Mother Nature originally provided.

Let me also mention that there are a number of holes at the course that are simply pedestrian designed stuff that could have been a good bit better given the outstanding nature of the site. Like I said before -- a pity.

Dave:

Got to give you credit for being a devil's advocate -- but you're barking on the wrong block -- especially if it's directed at me and my assessments on what TF designs.

[George Pazin]

For whatever reason, I tend to get into lots of disagreements with Matt. However, in this instance, I think he is making a valid point. Pine Hill may be a wonderful course - heck, top 10 public in NJ is pretty damn good - but pointing out weaknesses comes with the game - this is a discussion site. Only 100 courses can fill out the Top 100, and, as one of the compilers of one of the lists pointed out, the differences once you get past the top 10 tend to be rather miniscule.

All greens are tough for me - though not all greens are interesting. It is kind of funny, if you think about it, that Fazio is criticised for greens that "fit the landscape". Could be that the criticism is warranted (maybe he didn't find the "right" greensites) or it could be the the criticism is unwarranted.

I hope I get to find out the course's value myself someday.

[Ted Kramer]

Ted;

I could have sworn we saw the skyline from 12, but you'd know better than me.  I'm not sure that invalidates my contention that the routing was more concerned about the view from the next tee and the skyline than about playability, walkability, and intimacy of routing issues, and takes you right back up the same hill you just played down to accomplish it.

Also, does the golfer really have much of a choice on the 12th on the tee shot?  I mean, it seems that the left center (and not too long) is the only play....the right side is blocked out by trees.  

Then, since he forced you left, the approach has to confront and carry the front left bunker, correct?  What are the strategic choices?

Great question.
Right is definitely no good. So you really are forced left.
How far should you hit your drive?
Length is the big gamble here.
You can hit it far enough (270) to have a very nice level lie, however anything in the 235-260 range leaves that downhill lie. Anything short of that area does afford a level lie, but a considerably longer approach.

Now for the front left bunker . . .
From the preffered left side that bunker really isn't in the line of an approach to a hole cut from the middle of the green to the far right. Now a shot to a back left hole loctation is a different story. . .Is your strategy going to be to contend with the bunker in an effort to get it close, or are you a conservative player who would prefer to play to the fat of the green a then try your hand two putting from 40 feet?

So I would say that the strategic elements are these:

1. Length of tee shot. Is it worth hiting driver to a small target risking a downhill lie in order to have a wedge in, or would you rather play into the green from the safer spot 40 yards short.

2. Attack a left pin over the deep greenside bunker or play safe to the middle of the green and deal with the lengthy putt.

-Ted

****EDIT****
And I'll have to look more closely from the 12th tee to make sure that you can't see the skyline, I'll respond conclusively once I'm certain. For now I'll say that I'm better than pretty sure that you don't see it.

And I agree that whether you see it on 12 tee or not, your point about the routing is NOT entirely invalidated. It is still a valid point, although I'm not so sure it bothers me too much.

I played Pine Hill on Sunday and although the sky wasn't bright blue and crystal clear, I can say pretty confidently that you can not see the Philly skyline on #12. The skyline was very obvious on #3 and #13, but I couldn't see it at all from #12 tee and I was looking.

The routing is a little muddled in that 12-13-14 section . . .but like others have said, the hill is there, you're gonna have to deal with it in some fashion. I personally don't mind the trade-off of the uphill walk from #12 green to #13 tee being that the view from #13 tee really is something special.

-Ted

[ForkaB]

I'm not a racist because I have 3 black friends.....

Shivas

To anybody from Chicago, anybody with a tan looks "black."  No fair counting Moriarty, Naccarato and Papazian as one of those "friends."

[Tags:]

Tags: