[Mike_Sweeney]

Coming off of #3, a great downhill par 3 with a fantastic green, the player is faced with this visually intimidating shot on #4:



Assuming you listened to your caddy and executed the shot, to this wide landing area, you are faced with this approach:



In the double standards of my world as Greens Chairman for a day at Pine Valley, I say leave every tree on this hole! Even the ones on the right corner of picture #2 which may block you out. What say you?

[TEPaul]

Mike:

No way. On that hole there're some of the coolest little bunkers you ever saw on the left up the hill, next to #2 green and on down the hill. There's no reason at all to have those bunkers in trees. On the right I'd expose that big bunker a bit more by taking out about 2-3 trees but I think I'd rather see the trees on the right rather than the road or the buildings. Up on the hill there's a lone pine that has always been the aiming point of the ideal tee shot on that hole that looks from the tee almost like you're driving the ball into the bunkers on the right. It's deceptive as hell because if you get it right over that tree and long enough you're gonna end up right in the middle of that fairway on the lower level. There is the coolest (blind) kicker you ever saw along the very right side of that fairway.

There's only one area of strategic trees on that golf course I'd definitely leave and that's on the left side of #11. You cannot believe how much that gets in your head on the tee shot and it just intensives that entire right side, and the entire thinking on the tee shot. BTW on #11 I'd take out enough trees on the right so you could see the green from the tee. That's the way it used to be, and that would be way cool if they restored that look of a peak at the green from the tee.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Paul,

Bingo.

Man, you're on fire today!  

[Joel_Stewart]

The trees are the least of the problems on this hole.  Tom Fazio has been trying for years to get the tee moved back on this hole by as much as 50 yards.  From what I understand, Gordon Brewer has finally decided to go ahead with this change and work is either starting or going to be started soon.    As a result, most drives with barely reach the top of the hill with very few being driven way down the other side.  This hole is about to get very very hard.

[TEPaul]

Mike:

There's a post in the back pages from maybe two years ago where I went right through every hole out there and explained in minute detail what I'd do tree-wise and also all the reasons why. Obviously Pat Mucci completely missed that one too.   The man is just unbelievable. You can tell him ten times in a row it's noon and sunny out and he thinks you're claiming it's midnight.

[Jay Cox]

I've never been to Pine Valley and know relatively little about its routing, so I have what might be a silly question:

Where are the trees in the background of #4 fairway when viewed from the tee?
Could one remove those trees, creating a skyline fairway?  Would that screw up the view or the play on the approch, or on some toher hole?

I'm a sucker for skyline fairways and skyline greens.

Even without having played PV, I find Tom Paul's analysis fascinating.  It makes me want to play even more than I already did, just to be able to form a somewhat informed opinion.

[redanman]

The amout of fill needed to just add a tee 50 yds further
back on #4 is staggering.  It might even require building a bridge,
not even considering how many trees need to go to grow grass
 on the tee!

We discussed jsut that topic the other day.

[david h. carroll]

Jay those trees you see are on the left side of the fairway after the crest of the hill and you can just make out the tops of some others that I believe continue down the left side as the fairway tumbles downhill.  THe optimal line for the tee shot is over the caddies head in the first picture.  Those trees on the left are in bunkers.

[TEPaul]

JayC:

Those trees over the crest of the 4th fairway are between the 2nd and 4th fairways. Maybe they could take them down and create a skyline fairway but they'd need to be real careful to look to see what else they might expose---such as Mel Dickinson's house.  

But for a skylne effect down there the best imaginable would be the 2nd green. The trees behind that green that could be removed to create that look basically mean nothing to anything else.

You like skyline fairways? If you could see what George Crump's initial routing of that golf course looked like you would see a number of holes that were the Mother of all Skyline fairways.

Oh My God, that man must've really enjoyed the thought of successfully driving up to the top of or over those kinds of landforms.

redanman said;

"The amount of fill needed to just add a tee 50 yds further
back on #4 is staggering."

redanman:

I very much doubt that fill needed to make a tee back there is the issue at all. One of the real problems with going back there is an environmental problem (environmental agencies that is).

It's pretty tricky getting as close to a body of water these days as that tee would need to be. I'm sure they can work it out but that's a big issue with that tee back there.

Also the tee back in that position they want to use makes the hole set up a lot more like a high dogleg right. You know how some people feel the new tee on #18 makes a golfer feel like he needs to cut his tee shot a bit? Well, you should see how much it looks like that back there on #4. And I can guarantee you it's a long way up to that fairway to be feeling like you may need to hit some kind of cut shot.  

Nevertheless, even if it is startling how far back that tee may be and how far it is up to that fairway, the thing to consider is the historical strategic ramification of it. Geo Crump and most particularly William Fownes insisted that the place even a great golfer should approach that green from was the top of the hill and definitely not the base of the fairway over the hill.

That particular approach shot was supposed to be one of the ultra "shot tests" at PVGC (basically your best driver and best brassie), and they did not want it to be compromised any more than Crump wanted to compromise the fact that no golfer was supposed to EVER be able to hit either of his par 5s in two shots.

[mike_malone]

 I have only played it once but I loved one feature I saw there. There was ample fairway on the side away from the dogleg on several holes. If this is one of the holes that has that ample fairway to the left wouldn't it be advisable to open up that side visually?

[TEPaul]

Mayday:

For your information the width on the top of that 4th fairway is app 70-75 yards wide. However because of the real interesting sort of diagonal filtering effect at the end of the top you do have to be a bit more careful about going left on that fairway than on most any other 70-75 yard wide fairway. But from a new tee 50 or so yards back even long bombers would need to step on it to get in trouble down the hill on the left which basically casts the ball off the fairway and into the woods on the left.

If they do put a tee way back there, the 4th hole will have two tees where the tee shot play will be just about as different strategically and otherwise as one could imagine.

[Pete Stankevich]

Like Mayday, I've only played PV once.  And I'd love to see those bunkers that were meant to be seen or in play.  But my only birdies of the day came at #4, #16, and #18 (and left it on the lip on #17!).  So I've got to say that although the tee shot on #4 is blind, it is one of those shots that just fits my eye, trees or no trees.  I took a much more aggressive line to the right of the caddie with a slight cut and I was left with a 9 iron in.  And yes, the wind was helping.  
So Mike, I agree.  Leave this hole alone.  I feel the pictures don't do it justice.  There's a lot more room out there than the pictures show.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Just when I thought that St Jude had given up on you,
you're begining to make progress.
Something I thought was impossible until your most recent post.

The pruning or topping of trees in the backround, RESTORING Crump's skyline fairway, should be undertaken... immediately.

It's another example of the benefits of implementing a tree management program at PV.

And, please don't tell me that it's part of the ten (10) year program to remove trees at PV.

That's like doctors telling the patient that they're going to remove a cancerous tumor, gradually, over a ten year period.
As if the cancer won't continue to spread during those ten years.

I'm glad you agree with me on RESTORING the skyline green on # 2.

How long will it take you to agree with RESTORING the skyline greens on # 17 and # 9 ?

[James Bennett]

Patrick Mucci

a skyline green on #9?  We discussed that on course last week.  It would be great if it could be achieved, but it does seem like a pretty steep drop-off behind the green.  If the trees were removed, would the high dune that #9 greens (yes greens) and #10 tee is built on remain stable?

When we played, we had a lot of trouble actually seeing the pin on #9 green.  As many of you know, the pins are white with a dash of red, and the flags have a lot of white in them (I think).  No breeze by the pin (because of the trees on the right) so the flag was hanging limp like the appendage of a honeymooner on day 3.  And, in the trees behind the left green is a white dogwood in full bloom.  Our host thought he saw the pin on the rh green (it was a piece of plastic behind the green!) and played a glorious 200 yard utility club ONTO THE WRONG GREEN!  Oh well, worse things happen at sea.

A skyline green on #9 would be really cool, if it can be implemented without destabilising the dunes behind.

James B

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jame Bennett,

I"m sure that the techniques exist, agronomic or mechanical, or both, to stabilize that hillside.

Early pictures posted by Paul Turner show the green in its near original form and it's indeed a GREAT skyline green, as was # 17.

Maintaining the skyline green as you get closer to the green may also be dependent upon topping off the trees to the right of the 18th fairway.  But, that too can be easily accomplished if the "will" to RESTORE the skyline green exists.

TEPaul,

Without CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, PROGESS IS IMPOSSIBLE

[Paul_Turner]

Geo Crump there on the 4th green.  One of the guys in a white hat.

See the burned trees in the background.

[Mike_Cirba]

the flag was hanging limp like the appendage of a honeymooner on day 3.
James B

I thought that bore repeating.  

[Kyle Harris]

the flag was hanging limp like the appendage of a honeymooner on day 3.
James B

I thought that bore repeating.  

That was a bad bad bad image of Jackie Gleason.

[JESII]

Good pull Mike, although I would think JB's country mates might be a bit sore about this admission. After all, James made sure to correct the use of the term Aussie (at least our pronunciation of it) with its comparative sound Pu**y. Sorry boys, JB let the real story out.  

[TEPaul]

To recreate a true skyline green on #9 they'd have to cut a lot of trees on the other side of the railroad tracks but unfortunately they don't own them. I believe that land over there belongs to the BS of A. It was for sale not long ago-- maybe it still is.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I"m not so sure of that.

Standing in the fairway 200 yards from the green the golfer is well below the level of the back of the green thus creating an angle that presents a view well above the horizon.

I'm fairly sure that the same angles apply at about 150 yards.

It's ony when you get very close to the green, if not on it that the trees across the railroad tracks come into view, and by that time, it's okay.

The key to a skyline green is the appearance of the green from the DZ as the golfer views his approach shot, and not the view from the green or its immediate surrounds.

It's worth another look.

Paul Turner,

Those burnt trees are an interesting observation.
One could build a case for retaining the skyline view of the hillside vis a vis a tree management program.

In all of the archived records that golf courses kept, did the superintendent at PV keep a log ?

That would sure help clarify intent in the early years.

[Paul_Turner]

Patrick

I think the skyline nature of the original tee shot is spectacular.  I think Mr Sweeney would have to agree!

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
I"m not so sure of that.
Standing in the fairway 200 yards from the green the golfer is well below the level of the back of the green thus creating an angle that presents a view well above the horizon."

Patrick:

Obviously you're not sure about that but I am. I stood out there in the winter of '04 with John Ott (he lives on the hole) just to look at that. You could see through the trees behind the green and you could definitely see the trees on the other side of the railroad tracks over the top of the profile of the green. And that was pretty much from the base of the fairway. I was looking at that situation because the old "skyline" effect of left #9 really was spectacular and it was apparently one of the things about the course Geo Crump was very fond of. Crump's intention was to turn #9 into somewhat of a dogleg left, with a bit of a bottle-neck effect with bunkering near the front of the green. He was going to bunker the back to catch balls running through the green.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()