[NAF]

I know this tree growth has been paired back tremendously at the 14th.  Any current pictures?  If I recall the caddy we had who had been at PV was upset that a lot of the gnarly stuff in the bunkers had been cleared.

What did Crump want here?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

WOW,
I did not even recognise that as # 14.
It really has changed dramatically..from the tee now, you can see lots of water, lots of sand, it is visually rather intimidating..all those trees in front of and to the sides have been cleared, creating a much wider visual of the hole
..I cannot believe that picture..
But TE will be able to truly answer your question

[TEPaul]

Noel:

A very interesting quesition indeed. Crump apparently never kept any real record of what he thought of PV as it was being constructed. The best we can probably do to determine what he thought of anything there is to refer to what I call "The Remembrances". Those were the hole by hole written notations of his two best friends and those apparently closest to him as he constructed the course---Simon Carr and W.P. Smith.

I never actually noticed it before but on that particular hole their independent "remembrances" are notably silent. Smith said nothing about #14 and Carr only said "O.K as George planned it".

We should probably remember, though, that that hole was not built or not completely built when Crump died suddenly in Jan 1918. Apparently #12, 13 and 15 were not finished either--they certainly had not be put into play when Crump died (and would not come into play for a few more years) but it's possible of all four of them (12-15) #14 may've been the most incomplete when Crump died.

Crump had a number of iterations for #14, the first being a par 4 and another one being one of the coolest looking "cape holes" you've ever seen!

[NAF]

Here is where my ball landed.. in the back bunker  
Tom, was this bunker always this clean?



Do you think the cape shot you refer to would have included the water near #15 tee in some form?
I've only had a little bit of time here (it was 32 degrees and sleeting when I played) so I can't remember all of the topography if u can refresh it 4 me.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Noel,

If you go to page 62 and page 66 in Geoff Shackelford's,
"The Golden Age of Golf Design",
I think you'll see what Crump wanted.

It's not what you pictured above.

Perhaps Tommy Naccarato or someone else can post the pictures on page 62 and 66.

I also don't think Crump envisioned the hole playing from 230 or so yards.

[TEPaul]

Noel:

No, of course the bunkers were not always that clean---the sand-proing of the sand areas of PV began about 3-5 years ago. Personally, I wish they'd go back to the way it always was. If they asked me, I'd say that the basically unraked bunkering of PV was one of the uniquenesses of the course that undoutedly got them to where they are so why mess with what got you to the dance? What do you think the chances are, though, that they'll ask me what I think they should do about their bunkers? There are no rakes on PV though and I very much doubt there ever will be.

The Cape Hole that was an iteration for #14 at one point was only on paper obviously. It was from approximately the same tee as this hole but to a green that sat right at what is now the the beginning of the 15th fairway.

The drawing is scaled so the super heroic shot would've been to drive it right at the green over the lake. I make that about a 240 yard carry. The other safer option would be to play it to the left onto a fairway which would've been along what is today the "nature walk" from the 15th tee to the 15th fairway!

The drawing doesn't even say if this was a par 3 or par 4, and that may've been one of the reasons it wasn't built (if it was a par 4).

[Brian_Gracely]

TEP,

Where would the 15th hole have started if that #14 option had been chosen, or is there not enough hisotorical records to correlate the two together?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

With Pat, TE and myself all here at the same time, reflecting on a picture that looks very different from the one that Pat is referring to...I smell danger!!




But in reality, I would think that Crump's vision was somewhere inbetween the two, which when I played last year was about the right blend...any critisism of that viewpoint?

[Mark_Fine]

Noel,
We believe this hole was an inspiration for Flynn for #7 at Lehigh CC.  It was also on Flynn's mind when he designed one of the greensites at Cherry Hills, #13.  That green was sadly remodeled in the early 1960's by Press Maxwell but will eventually be restored to a design much closer to what Flynn originally envisioned.  

Pine Valley had a strong influnence on Flynn and well it should have since he spent so much time there but that's another story.
Mark

[TEPaul]

Mark Fine:

Interesting about Flynn and #14 PV and #7 Lehigh, particularly since the evidence seems to point to the fact it was Flynn in conjunction with Govan and "in-house" that actually built or finished building #14 and perhaps parts of the others of the last four.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Wharton Palmer,

The picture on page 62 is circa 1922, the picture on page 66 is from 1925.

I would think that the 1925 picture evidences Crump's intentions, not just on # 14, but throughout the entire golf course.

If one suffers from claustrophobia the initial picture posted above may cause discomfort..

Are the shot values at # 14 that much different from the shot values at # 3 and # 5 ?

Have those holes individually and collectivley lost Crump's design integrity ?  Have they been morphed into ONE.

Are they now clones of one another ?  

[TEPaul]

"Are the shot values at # 14 that much different from the shot values at # 3 and # 5?"

"Have those holes individually and collectivley lost Crump's design integrity ?  Have they been morphed into ONE."

Pat:

That's a good question. According to Carr in 1914 this is what Crump wanted on par 3s and what he may've gotten after (according to Carr) "...particularly interrogating Colt".

#3=a long iron
#5=full shot with a wooden club (basically a driver when #5 was settled on with the suggestion of Colt's).
#10=a short iron

As you can see, Crump hadn't really settled on what the last par 3 would be in 1914.

Today with the new tee additions on both, #3 and #14 are going to be very similar in club selection and many thing even #10 from the new tips has gotten too long.

But the shot value from the tips on #5 are much different than the shot values from the new tips on #3 and #14.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

How are they different ?

It's a pass or fail situation, with very little room for error, with the possible exception of # 3, where FINDING a mis-hit is likely.  The same can't be said for # 5 and # 14.

Mis-hit either shot, both of which are very long, and it's curtains.

Do you think that Crump ever visualized making # 14 so long that a protective net, rising 20-30 feet would have to be erected by the 15th tee to protect golfers teeing off on # 15 from a tee shot that was mis-hit from the 14th tee, but not by a wide margin ?

Just look at the picture on page 66.
Do you think a 20-30 foot net was necessary in 1922-1925 ?

That hole is too long when one considers the surroundings, and the other par 3's on the golf course.

Someone is going in the wrong direction and sending the wrong signal to the golfing world.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()