FYI: Crump Cup @ Pine Valley - final matches Sun, Oct 2

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

My observations, from afar, lead me to believe that the concept of seperation and isolation have been co-opted and taken to extremes as a method of defending the vast overgrowth at PV.

Citing the overgrowth as a concept in harmony with Crump's wishes is a neat but flawed argument.

When one looks at the original and subsequent photo's taken from 1918 to 1928, ten years after completion, it's pretty easy to identify and quantify Crump's intent when it comes to trees, shrubs and scrub.

That intent has been corrupted and used as an excuse to justify benign neglect.

Rich Goodale hit the nail on the head.
As long as the course is rewarded with number one rankings there is NO incentive to undertake a tree management program.

The raters, who have a conflict of interest, are loathe to "tell it like it is", and as such, the # 1 ranking is perpetuated, as is the excessive, unrestricted, unmitigated growth of trees, shrubs and scrub.

Tree-shrub-scrub removal would enhance the look and playability of the golf course, which benefits the members and their guests.

The funds are there, but is the comprehension and the will ?

[wsmorrison]

Pat,

You'll notice my previous hole by hole post and Tom Paul's previous posts over the years discuss the trees that have encroached and subordinated lines of play and lines of sight.  We agree.  I think the removal of these obscuring trees still leaves the isolation desired by Crump and practiced by others of the Philadelphia School, notably Flynn while dramatically improving strategic decision making and playability.

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

Concerning your last few posts regarding some of your ideas and what you say is the simplicity of tree removal (skyline greens and such) all I can say is thank God you have nothing to do with PVGC. You have very little idea what you're talking about. Obviously you don't know enough about the golf course to recognize if any trees have been removed or not in the last few years.  

Concerning Friar's Head and Ken Bakst, you've stated a number of times that successful golf clubs and courses very much need benevolent czars like a Ken Bakst if they are fortunate enough to have one. I agree in Ken's case and thank God again after listening to your recommendations on Friar's Head he had the good sense to totally reject them.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

If I were Czar, PV would be a better golf course architecturally, you'd have a product reminiscent of Crump's intent, and yes, the pimple or a ridge would be inserted into
# 18 green.

I would also let you on the property between the hours of 8:00 pm and 5:00 am, but only if you left your guide dog, Coorshaw at the front gate.

Wayne Morrison,

I think we agree on 99 % of the tree-shrubs-scrub issues.

You know what needs to be done, so does TEPaul and so do I.
It's not that complicated and they have a PERFECT ROAD MAP in the form of irrefutable photographic evidence.

The questions remain:

Do they perceive the problem ?

Do they have the will to correct it ?

TEPaul,

With respect to Friar's Head and the 16th tee, that tee has a northern exposure and when I was last there, a good deal of shade.  I would imagine, that with traffic, maintainance could be a challenge.

Moving an alternate tee to the top of the dune would create wonderful visuals without compromising the architectural merits and integrity of the hole.

Time will tell.

P.S.   I still think that you were the inspiration for the Capital
        One ads featuring David Spade.

         Just say "NO" seems to by your modus operandi

         My ideas and methods are modus vivendi

         See, see the ball TE.
         Be, be the ball TE.
         And let the farce be with you  

[Paul Masters]

A few observations, thoughts and questions IMHO as this was my first, but hopefully not last, time seeing Pine Valley:

Thank you to Dan Herrmann for letting us know that Pine Valley was open to the public on a beautiful Sunday afternoon.  It was an experience that I will long remember!

Kudos to the many members of Pine Valley who went up to (i'm assuming the Supt.) to thank him for a job well done!  They couldn't believe how he turned the course around.

I also overheard that they are going through a transition with the Supt. position at Augusta National.  I'm not sure if this is accurate or not or why?

I have never seen a course with such strategic value on every shot from tee to green.....a true gem.  

I couldn't agree with Wayne Morrison more about the new tee on 14.  Rather than reducing the height of the middle tee, they just built a new tee on top.  It looks out of place and the view from the tee doesn't require any further height.

I understand that they are not finished building all of the new tees in order to add additional length to the course.  Does anyone know on what holes they are planning to lengthen?

I thought the green at 12 seemed tame compared to the rest of the course.  I wonder if they could have sloped the green even further from front to back as this is the lay of the land.

The rough between the bunkers and the green on 18 struck me as odd.  When I got to the top of the hill, I expected to see a very big and undulating green right behind the bunkers or sloped fairway, beyond the bunkers, leading to the green.  

[TEPaul]

"I couldn't agree with Wayne Morrison more about the new tee on 14.  Rather than reducing the height of the middle tee, they just built a new tee on top.  It looks out of place and the view from the tee doesn't require any further height."

PaulM:

How do you know they didn't reduce the height of the middle tee?  

The view of what from the tee (new tee)?  

"I understand that they are not finished building all of the new tees in order to add additional length to the course.  Does anyone know on what holes they are planning to lengthen?"

Yes, I do. I wouldn't say planning exactly but they've been thinking about adding tee length to #4 bigtime---maybe up to 50 or so yards. The thinking on that one is so more players would approach the green with long shots from the top of the hill which was the intended concept of Crump and also William Fownes on that hole.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
If I were Czar, PV would be a better golf course architecturally....."

Patrick, Patrick, Patrick----blasphemities like that are not condoned on this website. Furthermore "Pat Mucci" and "czar" is a total oxymoron.

[wsmorrison]

"How do you know they didn't reduce the height of the middle tee?"

Tom, if they did lower the height of the middle tee, they stopped too soon.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Masters,

If they added more slope to the 12the green, at the high speeds they get the green to, it would be unputtable.

It's perfect the way it is.

TEPaul & Wayne,

I always had the feeling that Crump intended # 12 to be a driveable or almost driveable green with a running draw, and that the lure for encouraging that effort, a clear view of the green, has been obscured by unmanaged tree-shrub-scrub growth.

[TEPaul]

Wayno:

Since those expensive new golf shoes you bought seem to be hurting your feet, I suggest you buy a new pair of elevator golf shoes to be used particularly at PVGC.

As usual this thread on the Crump Cup was unnecessarily diverted by Pat Mucci to foist his uninformed ideas on trees on PVGC, AGAIN.

If it hasn't been mentioned previously I'd like to really congratulate Mike McCoy, the Champion of the Crump Cup in 2005 who was the defending champion as well as the medalist in qualifying this year. I heard that in the finals he basicially didn't miss a shot. Looks like Mike McCoy might be the type of Crump competitor who can dominate an era of the Crump. He has a long way to go, however, since as I recall Jay Sigel must have won the Crump Cup at least nine times!!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

If you could read with an iota of comprehension, and, if you had a functioning memory, you would have seen that it was YOU and Dunlop White that diverted this thread long before I chimed it.

Dunlop White even posted pictures to help refresh your non-functioning memory and to refute your blind denial.  

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul & Wayne,
I always had the feeling that Crump intended # 12 to be a driveable or almost driveable green with a running draw, and that the lure for encouraging that effort, a clear view of the green, has been obscured by unmanaged tree-shrub-scrub growth."

Patrick:

It is my hope and even my belief that the trees along the left side of #12 and within the bunkering on that side will be removed opening that green up to view from the old tee. Of course that restoration may tempt more long hitters to attempt to drive that green.

However, your feeling of what Crump intended for that hole is, as usual, WRONG;

Crump spent a good deal of time and a good deal of thought on how to finalize that hole and it's green-end. As the record clearly states (The Remembrances) he wanted to make it extremely difficult for a long hitter to actually drive the ball onto the green surface, and as the record shows his technique to prevent that was to both extend and to raise the bunkering on the front and left of the green (next time your out there open your eyes and even you may be able to see this for yourself). He felt that would make driving the green surface extremely difficult, which was his intention.

So, once again, Pat, and as usual, your feeling about what Crump's intentions were are totally wrong, as are most of your ideas for what is best for PVGC. As someone once said on this website, if you're going to make beneficial and intelligent recommendations on a classic golf course you have to know the FACTS first! And if you want to know the FACTS on the creation of PVGC and Crump's intentions for the course you pretty much need to come see me, PAL.      

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

This is what Dunlop White said about tree removal at PVGC:

"I found literally hundreds of bunkers infested with vegetation 10-20 yards deep in the woods. (see below) Why not peel back the edges and re-expose these beauties? Seems to me that the course would improve drastically with some tree management. Any thoughts?"

This is precisely the same recommendations I've made for years now regarding the ideal tree removal program at PVGC---eg simply get all the trees out of all Crump's bunkering and their shot angles. (BTW, Dunlop said 10-20 yards. He may not have realized it but the trees on the left of #12 need to be removed to the tune of about 30+ yards).

The same trees that are evident in aerials from the 1920s which are there today (that were obviously much shorter and smaller than they are now) do not need to be removed, and that is precisely why the golf course could never be returned to the exact look it had in the 1920s, as you are suggesting.

Have you come up with one of your hair-brained schemes yet to shrink existing trees back to the sizes and heights they were 75 years ago Pat?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Crump's intentions manifest themselves, not in writings, but in his design principles as evidenced by the design and construction of the 12th hole.

The location of the green was in clear view to the golfer standing on the tee.

Crump deliberately left the front right of the green open, he didn't defend it with bunkers, mounds or other features.

He seemlessly transitioned the fairway into that green.

The tactical signal that Crump sent to the golfer's eye, was to hit to the right of the green with a draw in the hopes of putting the golfer in the best possible position for his approach.  And, if you were a long enough driver of the ball, your reward for your risk just might be the putting surface.

Must I teach you everything ?
I can only devote a limited amount of time to your development and awareness when it comes to golf course architecture, and quite frankly, your learning curve is rather flat.

Next, you'll want to tour the golf course at midnight, in carts with headlights, as was the suggestion at Sand Hills.
It's bad enough that Ran and I had to hide in embarrassment as you and those other yahoos from GCA.com rode around the dunes at Sand Hills in the back of a pick-up truck looking for phantom golf holes, rather than play the actual, in the ground, golf course.  Now, you fail to understand that actions, speak louder than words.

I've come to the conclusion that your vision, your ability to see architectural features, remains limited, in the dark.  
You see the same things during the day that you see at midnight.
   
If it wasn't for Coorshaw and his offspring, Bilben, you'd be totally lost.

And, admit it, it was me who told you, when you were happy when the judge sentenced you, that Marion was a Federal Penetentiary in Illinois and that Merion was a golf course in Pennsylvania.

 

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
A mind is a terrible thing to waste."

Patrick:

Very true, but in the case of PVGC and your ideas on it in this thread it would be more apropos to say that your mind is a very terrible thing to use!  

For you to assume that your ideas on hole #12 just because you've looked at it describe Crump's intention for that hole better than those men who knew him best and who were there with him for six years and whom he spoke with for six years about his intentions for the course, the holes of it and the details of those holes are more accurate than theirs is nigh on to ridiculous and totally arrogant. You seem to think you know what Crump's intentions were better than Crump himself did.  

[T_MacWood]

What exactly did Crump say about the use of trees and trees separating each hole?

[JESII]

Along the lines of Tom MacWood's question, due to the large piece of land covered, how many holes would not feel isolated if the trees were gone. In other words, I think the natural amount of land between holes does a great job of separating them any way, I think of parallel holes like 7/8, 9/11, 13/15, 15/16, 16/17. Just my thoughts.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JES II,

How about # 18 ?
It's effectively isolated from the other holes.

The ridgeline along # 2, # 3 and # 4 also offers seperation, as does the elevation difference at # 5.

TEPaul,

It's not arrogance, it's common sense, which, in your case,
isn't so common.

It's undeniable that Crump's intentions are manifested in the golf course architecture he created and not in some third party writings.

The actual design, strategy and features Crump created vis a vis constructing the 12th hole, represent Crump's intentions, not some ramblings that could be deemed interpretive at best.

The "PROOF" is in the actual hole.

You either see it or you don't.

Or, in your case, Coorshaw and Bilben either see it or they don't.

[wsmorrison]

"The actual design, strategy and features Crump created vis a vis constructing the 12th hole, represent Crump's intentions, not some ramblings that could be deemed interpretive at best."

12 through 15 were not in play when Crump died, nor were they in play in April of 1919.  They were finished afterwards.  It isn't clear where the attribution of the designing up of these holes lie.  The reminiscences of Carr and Smith regarding Crump's wishes were integral to the eventual designs of the holes.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

The golf course opened for play in 1918.
Crump died in 1918.

There are reported accounts that Crump himself stated that all 18 holes would be open for play in the fall of 1916.
So, which part of the 12th hole wasn't yet conceptualized, designed, constructed and ready for play ?

[wsmorrison]

Well Pat, I prefer to yield to Tom Paul on this as he's seen a lot more and studied this at much greater length than I have but by April 1919 holes 12 through 15 were not in play.   After the 11th hole they played 16,17,18,1,2,3 and 4 to finish the 18 hole course.  Hugh and Alan Wilson along with Flynn likely completed the designing up of the remaining holes.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

I don't know either and there seems to be vague and/or conflicting information on the subject

[Mark_Fine]

"Restoring" Pine Valley would be a very difficult task at best because clearly the design would have continued to evolve if Crump had not passed away.  There is much speculation about what he would have done, what he would have kept and what he would have changed over the coming years with the golf course.  That said, there should be little debate on "most" of the trees particularly those in play and those blocking prominent sight lines.  How Tom and Pat have time to debate this for six or seven pages of posts is beyond me  

I for one have not ranked Pine Valley high at all on conditioning for many years now.  It is way overgrown and the loss of sand is disturbing.  

My understanding is that all 18 holes were finally completed and open for play (at the earliest in 1920).  However, golf was being played at Pine Valley on the rest of the course from 1918 if not earlier.    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark Fine,

I entered the thread 3/4 of the way through page 2.

TEPaul requires a great deal of enlightenment before architectural principles dawn on him.

Most would "get it" after 1/2 a page.

Sadly, he takes longer, but, I promised his mom that I'd look after him, after all, I am his legal guardian and trustee.

[Mike_Cirba]

Hey Youz guyz...

I'm the one who "diverted" this thread.

I want proper credit when it's due.