[AndrewB]

http://www.uswomensopen.com/news/fought.html

A brief interview with John Fought about the Pine Needles restoration done a few years ago.

I haven't seen the course after these changes and welcome any comments on them, especially the changes to 14 and 15.

[Rob_Waldron]

I played the course after Fought completed his work and thought it was fabulous! Far more playable than #2 yet a very challenging test. His work on the greens is particularly good.

[Brad Tufts]

I've played PN both before and after, and to tell you the truth, I thought it played easier in the new configuration than the old.  The greens appear to be a bit less elevated, larger, flatter, and certainly more squared off.

The slopes and swales are still there, but not as pronounced (years of topdressing may have contributed to the look of the old greens).

The major changes to the course were:
1.  Lengthening #10 by moving the green back, a change that made the hole much less reachable in two, but still possible.
2.  A new tee on #14, making it a ball-busting par 4 of 450+, where it was previously a 480 par 5.  Changed from a birdie hole to a very tough and long slight dogleg right.
3.  A new back tee on #15, making this 430-yd par 4 play as a par 5 from about 510 or so.  This hole went from a very hard par to a birdie hole.

Overall, it is still a great challenge, a great course, and worth a play.  To me it represents how it would have played 50-75 years ago very nicely, as many of the greens pre-resto were beginning to get that Pinehurst #2 fall-off look.

[Brent Hutto]

I had the same thought as Brad about the effects of the redo on playability of the greens. When we played there a couple years pre-Fought it was quite easy for an incoming shot to land near the front of a green and still manage to trundle its way across the green and trickle into a bunker. One of my buddies had several (over the course of a 36-hole day) shots that he hit out of a greenside bunker roll its way across the green and into another.

I didn't see any of that sort of thing when the Dixie Cup guys played it just after the renovation. The greens will still reject bad shots but for the typical double-digit handicapper they are much more friendly to a decent but not high or spinning approach. I think now they are quite reminiscent of other Ross greens but not of Pinehurst #2's crowned ones.

[AndrewB]

Did Fought really flatten the contours around the greens?  I wouldn't have thought that would be part of a restoration effort.  Perhaps restoring the greens to their original size required this, or just made it easier to hit the green therefore increasing playability (but also enabling for a few more interesting hole locations too, hopefully)?

I played Pine Needles (pre-restoration) several years in a row while in college for a tournament.  Those that could carry the right rough (bunker?) on 14 would have a mid-iron in.  Those of us that were shorter would be left with a fairway wood or long iron if we could shape our shot around the bend.  I found it to be an interesting hole for me because I had to decide whether to challenge the right side or not to have a better chance at reaching the green.  It was a push over for most of the long hitters though.

15 was always long and difficult, uphill and sidehill.  From what I remember, I think this hole makes a more interesting par four than five since it's straight-away without many features.  The layup presumably wouldn't be overly interesting, and the approach shot not nearly as challenging given how much shorter it is.  But it's been several years now ... I should go re-read Ran's review (which was updated this year).

I guess I'm curious why the 14th wasn't left as a par five but lengthened, and why the 15th was lengthened to a par five.  Was is just because there was no room behind the existing 14th tee, or was this an improvement?  Perhaps I fear change too much.

[michael j fay]

Fought did not flatten the greens. The contours are all still there. He expanded the greens to the original sizes and shapes. There is still some pretty good fall off in areas. His bunker work is pretty darned good. He put the depth back into all the bunkers (fairway and greenside). He also added a few and took away a couple.

The work on 14 and 15 is very nice. Fourteen was a very easy par five and is now a difficult par four. Fifteen is not a ball breaking par five but much more difficult (mostly due to the OB right, left and long of the green) par five than 14 ever was.

The work was done using an aerial from the early 30's and a housing plan that had the hles drawn at the time the course was built.

The use of A-1, A-4 on the greens has made them quicker and more consistent.

Overall the course is about as difficult as it was before but much more enjoyable to play.

[Mike Hendren]

I was extremely disappointed by the extent to which housing encroaches on the 15th and, and to a lesser extent 17th holes at Pine Needles.  The second shot at 15 is like playing down a bowling ally with white stakes for gutters.  I felt like checking to see if my North Berwick insurance certificate provided coverage at Pine Needles.  I am slightly relieved that Ross was constrained by an existing housing plan.  

I also thought the greens did not have as much character as those across the street.

Mike

[Brent Hutto]

Michael Fay,

Do you think that recapturing the original green outlines makes it less likely for balls to trickle into bunkers?

Or is it more likely that the Dixie Cup guys I played with were just controlling their ball a little better than my buddies from a couple years earlier?

Then again, it may be in part due to playing the fall (Dixie Cup) versus the end of January.

[Jim Sweeney]

Brett, I think your experience with the greens at the Dixie Cup may have been due to weather or the time of year. I have been there four of the last five years in late March I have noticed no lack of firmness or roll off the edges of the greens. I find the restoration excellent. Mike Fay (BTW Mike, this thread reminds me I owe you a letter) did not mention that 14 and 15 were reverted to their original par figures. I liked 15 as a par four but love it as a 5. The slope and firmness of the fairway offers the opportunity to sling the ball a good ways at the risk of feeding into the left fairway bunkers, from which there is little to no chance to reach the green in two.

I have never felt that the houses encroached on 15 too much, but they certainly do on 16.

I don't think number ten green was moved. I could be wrong, but ifit was moved, the recreated green is identical to the original, right down to the position of the trees to the right of the green.

Overall, this was a very successful restoration/rehabilitation/renovation, whatever you want to call it. I hope there is good weather for the Women's Open and that the course gets the attention it deserves.

[michael j fay]

Ten green was moved nearly 60 yards but my impression when I first saw it was that it had not been moved.

Brett:

I don't think that the green restoration either helped or hindered getting the ball in the bunkers. The harder and faster the course plays has much more to do with visits to the kitty litter.

[AndrewB]

Interesting comments, folks.  Thanks.  I'll be watching the tournament this weekend but I really want to get back there to see the changes myself.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()