Part of Pine Valley's architectural genius ?

[Dan Boerger]

For those more knowledgeable, correct me if I'm wrong ...  but I thought one of the bets for first time PV visitors is that they will be given 5 shots (yes 5!) a hole by their opponent, but they have to win all 18 holes.

[archie_struthers]

 

Mark makes an interesting Oakmont aside that also holds true at Pine Valley. Often the first round of even a very good player is his best for a long time....he doesn't know much about the green on two....the dangers lurking on five.....and seven....eight ...ten......lol   etc etc


However , when one gets truly comfortable with the golf course , the "stuff" is much less intimidating....as are the intricacies of the greens

This is when the "locals" have a huge edge!

[Rick Sides]

o

[Sean Leary]

Every time I play there I am amazed how the really wayward shots end up OK with the caddies forecaddying. Last time I was there I blew my tee shots way right on 9 both days (almost surely gone) and both days the ended up within 3 yards of each other much closer to the fairway in a VERY playable lie. I wonder how that happens

I am guessing that the caddies know how to get visitors around the course, so to speak...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick - thanks.

I'm guessing that your 12-handicap friend is a straight driver of the golf ball (though probably not a long hitter) and perhaps a better than average iron player. 

In that instance, PV is fair in the sense that the results/scores are commensurate with the level of talent/quality of shots -- and probably very PRECISELY commensurate.

That is, a different kind of 12 handicapper -- e.g. a long but wild driver -- would not fare as well, and an 18 handicapper would fare even worse, and a crooked driving 18 worse than a straight driving 18

Peter, I don't know of many long and wild drivers who are 12 handicaps.

The "wild" part seems to predispose the golfer toward big numbers on a benign golf course, let alone PV.

This fellow is fairly long.  He gets a lot of ummph into the ball.

Years ago, I was allowed to take three other golfers with me.

One was an 18 handicap and he had the round of his life.
He was a fairly straight, relatively short hitter, yet he hit almost every fairway and most greens in one over regulation, or less.
The greens were at a reasonable speed and he posted the best round of several years.

Certainly a caddy who understands the course and its perils and who can relate to his golfer's game is of great help.

But, the notion that PV isn't suitable to the mid to higher handicap isn't true.

Certainly you don't think they throw out members who attain their 60th, 70th or 80th birthdays. [/color]

So, from what I've read here, maybe one could describe PV as EXACTINGLY FAIR.

It's just the opposite.

The generous fairways don't require exacting precision.
The large greens don't demand exacting precision.

I think you're contexting an 18 handicap in a scratch handicap's game.

18 handicaps don't hit greens in regulation, they don't make par after par.

They shoot 88 on a par/rated 70 golf course with 10 of their most recent 20 scores.  On the other 10 scores they shoot considerably higher. [/color]

What do you think?

I think it's an emminently fair course that gets progressively more demanding as your handicap gets lower and your expectations higher.

Remember too, that most golfers are playing matches at match play and not medal play.

So, when an 18 handicapper has a blow out hole, as anyone can, he merely moves to the next tee and enjoys the challenge presented by the next hole.

As to medal play, I'll bet any legitimately handicapped golfer on shooting his handicap at medal play, especially in competitions, on any course, including his home course.[/color]

[Phil McDade]

My last post was bouncing off Pat's assessment of PV as being FAIR and the experience of his 12 handicap friend -- who strikes me as one heck of a 12 handicap.

Peter

Peter:

I'd agree.

I wonder about this as well -- Do you think the difference between the ability of a 6-handicapper and a 12-handicapper is "less" (so to speak) than the difference between a 12-handicapper and an 18-handicapper? My experience, having played with a range of golfers, is that 12-handicappers are usually more capable of playing within the realm of a 6 handicap than an 18-handicapper playing at a 12. Maybe I'm wrong; I've heard it said that once you get to a certain level of ability -- certainly single-digit handicap -- it becomes much harder to lower your handicap, whereas even modest improvements consistently executed could get an 18 several strokes lower.

But my theory is that those differences (between a 6 and a 12, and between a 12 and an 18) become much more pronounced at a penal course (Pat's arguments notwithstanding) like PV. I just think some courses -- Pebble Beach in any kind of wind, Oakmont as has been suggested, perhaps Kiawah Ocean, PV -- can be near-unplayable for someone in the 18-handicap range. I played one once -- the original River course at Blackwolf Run in Kohler, WI -- and for my game, it was nearly unplayable. That contrasts to a place like Pinehurst #2, which from all accounts still represents a very tough challenge for the pros but can be played by 18-handicappers in a way that's not unduly penal.

But I'm open to other suggestions!

[JESII]

Phil and Peter,

You guys are right...and look at Pat's second to last sentence/paragraph...he agrees that the 18 has blowout holes that can be left behind...he just does not have the ability to actually agree with anyone...

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think Archie is right about the importance of hitting the greens at Pine Valley.  Since sand surrounds most greens, and some of the bunkers are very tiny and hard to play out of, hitting the green is vital. 

As for Oakmont, I believe the trouble lies in the greens.  The greens are not only lightning fast, but you could miss a putt by a an inch or two and find yourself twenty feet from the cup because of the wicked contours of the greens. To me, the greens at Oakmont were far more scary than Pine Valley.  That's not to say that they are better, just more intimidating.


Rick,

Have you played Oakmont since it was prepared for the 2007 Open ?

The fairways have been narrowed, the bunkers moved in as well, the bunkers deepened with fronting berms rising far above them.

Oakmont is a VERY difficult golf course TEE to GREEN, with the greens just piling it on.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Do you think the difference between the ability of a 6-handicapper and a 12-handicapper is "less" (so to speak) than the difference between a 12-handicapper and an 18-handicapper?

No[/color]

My experience, having played with a range of golfers, is that 12-handicappers are usually more capable of playing within the realm of a 6 handicap than an 18-handicapper playing at a 12.

That's irrelevant.

An 18 handicapper isn't looking to hit 18 greens in regulation, he's looking to shoot 90.  Tee shot in the WIDE fairway, second shot in the WIDE fairway, approach to the BIG, WIDE green, and two putt.

Pine Valley accomodates that type of play for an 18 handicap.

The trouble arises in several areas, one of which is when the 6 and/or 12 handicap tries to hit the green in regulation, from his DZ, and misses.[/color]

Maybe I'm wrong; I've heard it said that once you get to a certain level of ability -- certainly single-digit handicap -- it becomes much harder to lower your handicap, whereas even modest improvements consistently executed could get an 18 several strokes lower.

What's that got to do with anything when it comes to playing PV ?[/color]

But my theory is that those differences (between a 6 and a 12, and between a 12 and an 18) become much more pronounced at a penal course (Pat's arguments notwithstanding) like PV.

Over how many years, and how many times have you played PV ?

It's a very wide, generous golf course on most holes.
With WIDE fairways and LARGE greens, where is it penal ?
[/color]

I just think some courses -- Pebble Beach in any kind of wind, Oakmont as has been suggested, perhaps Kiawah Ocean, PV -- can be near-unplayable for someone in the 18-handicap range.

Pebble Beach has small greens.
Oakmont has narrow fairways.
Neither course offers width combined with large greens, hence the comparison is flawed.[/color]

[Tommy Williamsen]

Pat, I think you have a good point about the course management of the higher handicap player at PV.  I just don't know many who play that way.  I am a four and find thirteen a tough trek much of the time.  It is hard to lay up to the right even though it may be the smart play.

[JESII]

Pat,

You are assigning course management and execution of the conservative plan to players who, by definition, are not prone to creating and following an appropriate game plan.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat, I think you have a good point about the course management of the higher handicap player at PV. 

I just don't know many who play that way.  I am a four and find thirteen a tough trek much of the time.  It is hard to lay up to the right even though it may be the smart play.

Tommy, here's the flaw in your position.

The 12 or 18 handicapper isn't laying up, he's hitting away from the trouble left.  And, he has no aspirations of hitting that green in two.  He's content to hit it in 3 or 4.

The same thing with # 2.
He's not going to try to hit a long iron or wood into that green, he's going to lay up, especially if he has a good caddy, and pitch his third onto the green.

It's the par 3's that are the high handicappers nightmare, not the par 4's.

And, the 12 or 18 handicapper isn't playing the back tees, he's playing the middle or front tees.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

You are assigning course management and execution of the conservative plan to players who, by definition, are not prone to creating and following an appropriate game plan.

I disagree with that.

A high handicap is not an indication of a lack of intelligence.
Course management isn't the proprietary domain of the low handicapper.

And, the caddies at PV are usually very good.
They serve as excellent guides to all but the dense of mind, high and low handicap alike.

Mid to high handicappers can navigate PV quite well.
Their down fall is probably the par 3's with # 7 and # 15 close behind.

How do you account for older aged members, who are mid to high handicappers, maintaining their handicap ? [/color]

[JESII]

How do you account for older aged members, who are mid to high handicappers, maintaining their handicap ?

Conservative play, which I attribute more to their age than their handicap...

[Phil McDade]

Patrick:

I've never played PV; I'm guessing the number of GD posters who have is quite limited.

I'd agree about the par 3s at PV; they look more intimidating than many of the par 4s and 5s. But most of the holes at PV require significant carries, no?

It's been my observation that most 18-handicappers play to an 18-handicap because all parts of their game fail them at some point in the round, not just one or two (topped or severely wayward drives, botched or wayward approaches with irons, sand shots left in bunkers, putts badly misjudged, general course management, i.e., knowing when to punch out vs. trying to advance the ball down the fairway after a poor drive, club selection generally).

I think your solution to how the 18-handicap would take on PV -- conservatively, not forcing shots into greens with significant carries -- is the right one, but I think you underestimate how difficult even this approach would be for the high handicapper. For instance, my impression of PV's greens is that anything beyond 20 feet can often be a tough two-putt to negotiate, at  any green speeds. The ability of a high handicapper to hit even a shortened approach shot to within 20 feet is pretty inconsistent.

One more addendum -- does anyone out there have the actual yardages from PV's three tees, and perhaps even a rundown of the card from three tees? It'd help inform my judgements about Patrick's central point.

[TEPaul]

Phil:

The yardage on the card from the present back tees is 6999. I don't believe they use tee markers back there all the time though. The only other tees listed on the PV scorecard are at 6532.

[Patrick_Mucci]

How do you account for older aged members, who are mid to high handicappers, maintaining their handicap ?

Conservative play, which I attribute more to their age than their handicap...

Would you equate conservative play with defensive play ?

Isn't that what most mid to high handicapper do when they play PV ?
Play conservatively/defensively.

What mid to high handicapper plays PV "Aggressively" ?
None that I've ever seen.

Your assessment of their play is conjecture.

Their handicaps are factual.

Are you stating that ALL mid to high handicap members at PV play conservatively ?

And, that if you play aggressively, you can't be a mid to high handicapper ?[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

I've never played PV; I'm guessing the number of GD posters who have is quite limited.

I'd agree about the par 3s at PV; they look more intimidating than many of the par 4s and 5s.

But most of the holes at PV require significant carries, no?

Not really.
Only on a few holes, such as # 5 and # 15.
PV isn't a course for beginers, but, the carries aren't heroic for the most part.[/color]

It's been my observation that most 18-handicappers play to an 18-handicap because all parts of their game fail them at some point in the round, not just one or two (topped or severely wayward drives, botched or wayward approaches with irons, sand shots left in bunkers, putts badly misjudged, general course management, i.e., knowing when to punch out vs. trying to advance the ball down the fairway after a poor drive, club selection generally).

The caddies at PV are quite skilled at guiding golfers around the course, and, my point is that the abundant width and large greens provide ample  margins for the game you describe above, thus accomodating the mid to high handicapper quite well[/color]

I think your solution to how the 18-handicap would take on PV -- conservatively, not forcing shots into greens with significant carries -- is the right one, but I think you underestimate how difficult even this approach would be for the high handicapper.

For instance, my impression of PV's greens is that anything beyond 20 feet can often be a tough two-putt to negotiate, at  any green speeds. The ability of a high handicapper to hit even a shortened approach shot to within 20 feet is pretty inconsistent.

That's not true either.

Many greens are absent susbstantive contour, like # 1, # 4, # 7, 13, 14 and 16.  Others are sloped, but not excessively so, like # 8, 9, 10 and 18.

There are some that can be treacherous if you're on the wrong side of the hole like # 2 and # 5, but, what you and others fail to realize is that PV's greens aren't always fast.  In fact, last week they were very slow.

For some reason many people feel that ANGC, PV and a few other courses keep their greens at a constant stimp of 13 when nothing could be further from the truth.

If PV was such a tortuous test, members wouldn't remain there for decades and decades as they aged.  Yet, the course provides a fair, fun test to all levels of golfers until the greens get goofy.[/color]

One more addendum -- does anyone out there have the actual yardages from PV's three tees, and perhaps even a rundown of the card from three tees? It'd help inform my judgements about Patrick's central point.

I don't believe knowing the precise yardage will adversely affect my premise, but then again, I"ve only been playing PV for 44 years.[/color]

[Paul_Turner]

The greens at PV have plenty of contour.  They may not be wild like say the 6th at NGLA but they are far from flat have complicated, substantive, borrows and take some putting:

You can even see the breaks on these rather small pics of 4th and 16th:


16th


4th

Most of the holes at PVGC have 100-150 yards of sandy waste carry from the forward tees to the fairway.

[Phil McDade]

"But most of the holes at PV require significant carries, no?

Not really.
Only on a few holes, such as # 5 and # 15.
PV isn't a course for beginers, but, the carries aren't heroic for the most part."

Patrick:

World Atlas of Golf (3rd edition, revised and updated):

PV: Par 70, 6,765 yds.

Hole No. 1 (427): significant carry from tee to fairway, another smallish carry just after the dogleg.

2 (367): Tee to fairway carry; another carry from fairway to green.

3 (185): entirely a carry tee to green.

4 (461): tee to fairway carry; another carry from fairway to a piece of fairway fronting the green.

5 (226): nearly entirely all carry, for at least 180 yards, partially over water.

6 (391): tee to fairway carry.

7 (585): I count three carries on Hell's Half-Acre -- tee to fairway, fairway to layup fairway, layup fairway to green. "It may be the most exacting par-five in the world," according to the World Atlas.

8 (327): tee to fairway carry.

9 (432): tee to fairway carry, plus another carry from fairway to fairway portion fronting green.

10 (145): All carry, with what the Squire charitably described as the "Devil's Hole" staring you in the face as part of that carry.

11 (399): tee to fairway carry.

12 (382): tee to fairway carry.

13 (446): tee to fairway carry, with another carry to secondary fairway fronting green. "The 13th is the epitome of the heroic hole in golf..." World Atlas.

14 (185): entirely carry over water.

15 (603): tee to fairway carry entirely over water.

16 (436): tee to fairway carry, with another carry from fairway to secondary fairway fronting green.

17 (344): tee to fairway carry, with a fairway to green approach that's entirely all carry.

18: (424): tee to fairway carry, with a fairway to green approach that's entirely all carry and partially over water.

I count 29 carries. Whether some of those are significant/heroic I'd leave to your judgement, as you've played the course alot and I haven't. But the World Atlast write-up, my own observations about the course from research and others, and televised events like the Nelson-Littler match suggest more than few of them are of a heroic nature.

Sully, whose caddying experience there is significant, suggests in post #18 that putting from 20+ feet on PV's greens is more challenging than you suggest, regardless of speed.

I don't doubt the aid of a caddie would help my game substantially in playing PV.

Knowing the yardage from the tees I'd be playing at, I believe, would help inform my view of my ability to play the course near my (alleged) 18-handicap. For my game, the difference between 6,100 yards and 6,500 yards is significant, and would greatly impact my judgement about how to play the course.

[TEPaul]

"Not really.
Only on a few holes, such as # 5 and # 15."


Patrick:

When it comes to Pine Valley, you really should just keep your mouth shut and listen. Some of the things you've said about the place over the years are laughable beginning with labelling the first green as a good "skyline".   

As for good forced carries of course depending on where the tee blocks you're playing----#4 can be a pretty good carry and the tee shot on #7 sure is now. #18 from the back is 248 yards too.

When it comes to Pine Valley you really should just keep quiet and listen! 

[JESII]

Many greens are absent susbstantive contour, like # 1, # 4, # 7, 13, 14 and 16.  Others are sloped, but not excessively so, like # 8, 9, 10 and 18.

Pat,

I am going to assume you were drunk when you wrote the above line...or there is another Pine Valley hiding out there somewhere that I don't know of...in which case I recant everything I've said on this thread because I haven't been to that one...

[David Stamm]

Tom, I know you and I have had many conversations about PV. I remember you telling me that the reason I saw so many ridiculous scores retold by Warner Shelley in the club history was not because of the course design per se, but because of the surrounds. The fact that the waste areas are not raked plays a huge part in this I would think.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Not really.
Only on a few holes, such as # 5 and # 15."


Patrick:

When it comes to Pine Valley, you really should just keep your mouth shut and listen. Some of the things you've said about the place over the years are laughable beginning with labelling the first green as a good "skyline".   

I looked at that green from the DZ again.
The trees immediately behind the green should go.
Unfortunately, there are far to many trees to the right of the second tee, but, without them and you have a skyline green, especially on foggy days [/color]

As for good forced carries of course depending on where the tee blocks you're playing----#4 can be a pretty good carry and the tee shot on #7 sure is now. #18 from the back is 248 yards too.

No wonder you don't get it.
Since when do 12 and 18 handicaps play the back tees or the tips ?
They don't, hence they'll never face carries meant for the scratch handicap.[/color]

When it comes to Pine Valley you really should just keep quiet and listen! 


You have so much to learn grasshopper, and I only have so much time.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

"But most of the holes at PV require significant carries, no?

Not really.
Only on a few holes, such as # 5 and # 15.
PV isn't a course for beginers, but, the carries aren't heroic for the most part."

Patrick:

World Atlas of Golf (3rd edition, revised and updated):

PV: Par 70, 6,765 yds.

Hole No. 1 (427): significant carry from tee to fairway,
There is NO significant carry on # 1.  It's less than 125 yards.[/color]

another smallish carry just after the dogleg.

There is NO carry after the dogleg, it's all fairway to the green.[/color]

2 (367): Tee to fairway carry;
It's an elevated tee and the carry is NOT substantial.[/color]

another carry from fairway to green.
The high handicapper won't be attempting to reach the green, they'll be laying up, approaching the green with a wedge for their third shot, thus the carry is inconsequential.[/color]

3 (185): entirely a carry tee to green.

I indicated that the par 3's present the greatest challenge/carries
However, # 3 plays downhill and the green is 44 yards deep, reducing the carry to the front by 22 yards.  From 169 yards, that leaves a downhill carry of 147 yards, which plays to about 130-140, hardly a substantial carry.[/color]

4 (461): tee to fairway carry; another carry from fairway to a piece of fairway fronting the green.

The tee to fairway carry is NOT substantial.  As to the other carry it's a simple choice for the high handicap, play short or carry, depending upon where the tee shot ends up.  The green is nearly 10K sq.ft[/color] 

5 (226): nearly entirely all carry, for at least 180 yards, partially over water.

See my previous comment about the par 3's.[/color]

6 (391): tee to fairway carry.

There is NO carry of consequence if the golfer plays to the left side of the fairway.  The only carry of consequence arises when a golfer tries to bite off a shorter route to the green.[/color]

7 (585): I count three carries on Hell's Half-Acre -- tee to fairway,
There is NO carry on the tee shot.[/color]

fairway to layup fairway,

The sand hazard is 115 yards long.  Hardly a substantive carry.[/color]

layup fairway to green. "It may be the most exacting par-five in the world," according to the World Atlas.

It's a wonderful par 5, but, with extensive fairway widths of 40-50 yards and a very large green the high handicapper has plenty of margins.[/color]

8 (327): tee to fairway carry.

The tee is located well above the fairway and the carry isn't significant.
[/color]

9 (432): tee to fairway carry,

The tee is elevated above the fairway and the carry isn't onerous.[/color]

plus another carry from fairway to fairway portion fronting green.
There is NO carry into the green.[/color]

10 (145): All carry, with what the Squire charitably described as the "Devil's Hole" staring you in the face as part of that carry.

The tee is elevated 27 feet above the green.
At 137 yard, the carry is benign.
And, the DA is hardly noticeable from the tee.[/color]

11 (399): tee to fairway carry.

Again, the tee is elevated above the fairway and the carry is benign.[/color]

12 (382): tee to fairway carry.

Again, the tee sits above the 50 yard wide fairway and the carry is benign.[/color]

13 (446): tee to fairway carry,

I don't consider a 100-125 yard carry a problem.[/color]

with another carry to secondary fairway fronting green.

Not really, the second fairway, seperated from the first fairway ONLY by rough sits well below the first fairway, thus the shot to the second fairway is fairly benign.[/color]

"The 13th is the epitome of the heroic hole in golf..." World Atlas.

Only for the scratch golfer attempting to reach the green in two when the hole is cut far left.  Theres ample room short right of the green.[/color]

14 (185): entirely carry over water.

At 168 yards, steeply downhill, with a green of about 5,700 sq/ft, the carry is more like 140 yards at the most.[/color]

15 (603): tee to fairway carry entirely over water.

That carry is probably in the 150 range, maybe less.[/color]

16 (436): tee to fairway carry,

The carry to the left side of the fairway, from an elevated tee isn't onerous.[/color]

with another carry from fairway to secondary fairway fronting green.


There is NO required carry from the DZ in the fairway, there's a benign patch of rough that bifurcates the fairway, and the green is almost 12,000 sq/ft[/color]

17 (344): tee to fairway carry,

The carry to the fairway is minimal.[/color]

with a fairway to green approach that's entirely all carry.

Only if the golfer intends to go for the green in two.
A high handicapper, laying up, would have a short pitch shot.[/color]

18: (424): tee to fairway carry,

The tee is elevated so high above the fairway that you can see the bridge connecting NJ to PA.  The tee shot is sharply downhill to a fairway at least 50 yards wide.[/color]

with a fairway to green approach that's entirely all carry and partially over water.

The high handicapper can lay up short of the water, and have a wedge into the green, hardly a heroic carry.[/color]

I count 29 carries. Whether some of those are significant/heroic I'd leave to your judgement, as you've played the course alot and I haven't. But the World Atlast write-up, my own observations about the course from research and others, and televised events like the Nelson-Littler match suggest more than few of them are of a heroic nature.

The problem you and others are having, and, the flaw in your reasoning is that you're basing your assessment for mid to high handicap golfers on golf played from the back tees by scratch golfers, in conjunction with the phobia about hitting greens in regulation, something that's usually not a concern of the 18 handicapper.

Pine Valley is emminently fair for the mid to high handicapper due to the very wide fairways and very large greens.

Those features provide sufficient margins of error for a reasoned golfer.

That's why PV is so popular amongst mediocre to expert players.

Each game can be adequately accomodated by the architecture.[/color]

Sully, whose caddying experience there is significant, suggests in post #18 that putting from 20+ feet on PV's greens is more challenging than you suggest, regardless of speed.

That's the dumbest statement I've heard on GCA.com since TEPaul said something.

I can assure you that NO green was challenging last week.

Increased SPEED is what makes those greens exponentially more difficult.

Sully's comments are the product of too many sleepless nights.

Having never played PV, by what evaluative process do you assess my responses ?[/color]

I don't doubt the aid of a caddie would help my game substantially in playing PV.

Knowing the yardage from the tees I'd be playing at, I believe, would help inform my view of my ability to play the course near my (alleged) 18-handicap. For my game, the difference between 6,100 yards and 6,500 yards is significant, and would greatly impact my judgement about how to play the course.

I wouldn't trust your judgement about how to play the course.
That's where the caddy comes in.
You'll do better trusting HIS judgement, rather than your own.

He's been there before, he knows what you should do to best navigate the golf course.[/color]

P.S.  Go to Google Earth, it's more reliable than the World Atlas of Golf when it comes to examining the golf course..