News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ran Morrissett

  • Karma: +0/-0
What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« on: June 30, 2002, 08:42:13 PM »
Given that Ross continually refined/tinkered with No. 2 while he was alive, it seems entirely reasonable to me that he would be doing X and Y to the course if he was alive today.
My question is: what would he be doing?

I ask having just played it yesterday with Ted Sturges and Hart Huffines and coming away yet again AMAZED by the quality of each hole. More so than any course in the world, I would struggle to nominate its three least distinguished holes.

So what would Ross do today to his masterpiece? Truthfully, nothing springs to mind, hence the question.

Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2002, 05:36:06 AM »
This is one of those weird questions. It's always a bit forced to wonder what someone would have done - and then to adjust accordingly. Ross woud be 130 years old. How do youi deal with that? I don't mean to be facetious, but maybe the best thing is to see how much the game has changed - distance, bunker play, lob wedges, turfgrass grooming.

It's very dangerous to assume that Ross would have reacted the way you wanted him to. He spent more time than most GCA'ers would care to acknowledge updating his courses, modernizing bunkers, and making some of his pre-1920 courses relevant to post 1930s play. Of course he also had the good sense of leaving many courses untouched.

I've always suspected that had Ross watched the 1999 U.S. Open at Pinehurst, he would have been amazed to see that none of his fairway bunkers were in play - surely he would have responded to that.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2002, 06:33:48 AM »
Brad says:

"I've always suspected that had Ross watched the 1999 U.S. Open at Pinehurst, he would have been amazed to see that none of his fairway bunkers were in play - surely he would have responded to that."

Do you think Ross would have felt the same for his courses generally?  

Would he want to move bunkers that are now 220 from the tee out to 250/260?

Bob
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2002, 07:15:50 AM »
I'll stab that he would either soften the greens for today's high green speeds or demand slower green speeds on #2.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dave_Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2002, 08:04:38 AM »
Would Ross have been appalled at the impact of the stimpmeter on his greens?  I suggest he would.  Would he have made design changes to the greens because of this?
I suggest not for then we would not have the wonderful greens of Donald Ross.  
Pinehurst No.2 without the inverted saucers, etc on many of those greens would not be Pinehurst No.2
Would he have adjusted length for the technology changes? Probably, for he most certainly had to consider the technology of the day when designing his courses.
He probably is very happy he doesn't have to listen to all of us amateur architects deciding what a great master would do today.
Fairways and Greens
Dave
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

JayC

Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #5 on: July 01, 2002, 08:20:28 AM »
Brad,
Isn't that what RTJ did to Oakland Hills in preperation for the '51 Open?
The South Course takes lots of hits on this site but I thought it was fabulous.
Greens to rival #2.  I'll guarantee you that Steve Jones was thinking about missing that 1-footer on #18.
Another question could be what would Ross do to Oakland Hills. ???
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2002, 08:26:02 AM »
I posted this about six months ago, but many have seen the Ross plans for Oakland Hills in 51.  He was commissioned to do the work, but passed on.  RTJ took over.  Those who have seen them say that Jones incorporated many Ross ideas, and that both plans show more bunkering than the original, and bunkers moved out to then current distances.  Of course, there were some differences.

The question would be, was Ross commissioned to redo Pinehurst for an Open, or would he have tinkered to make it a good test of golf, and suitable as a resort?  For the USGA, he certainly toughened up his course, from what I can tell.

Regarding moving his bunkers out, he designed using doglegs at about 200 yards, and related fw bunkers to the dogleg in a variety of ways.  I'm pretty sure he would move the dogleg points out (I think he did increase them from 200 to 225 later in his career) to current distances and bunker in similar style there, but thats just my opinion.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Ran Morrissett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2002, 09:24:28 PM »
At No. 2 where few of the fairway bunkers are cut into natural landforms (like the one on the right of the 18th fairway or the one on the right of the 8th fairway at Beverely CC), Ross would be indeed relatively free to move them around as he wished.

Two things that we thought of today:

1) I would think that Ross would prefer that the course set-up of the par threes be more varied. In my case, I hit a 5, 7, 5, and 6 iron into the four one shotters  :P on a calm day and it could easily be a 2, 8, 4, and 6 iron with a little more thought.

2) I wish more sandy areas were left exposed throughout the course, making No. 2 more reflective of its sandhills location. For instance, thoughout the early 1980s, the left and right side of the 4th fairway and much of the left of the 5th fairway was kept in a sandy/scrubby state ala how the right of the 3rd fairway plays today.

Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

jim_lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2002, 01:20:18 PM »
I've never thought about what Ross might do to #2, and I can't seem to get interested in speculating on that question. On the otherhand, I have often thought about what changes I would make. My short answer is, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. At least, I am sure I would not make any changes to accommodate professional competitions, if those changes had a detrimental effect on the members and resort guests who play the course every day.

After giving the question much consideration, I have now thought of one change I would make.  I would fill in the small pond which fronts the sixteenth (par 5) tee.  That pond is completely out of play except for topped and extremely short tee shots (especially by women). In other words, it only punishes those tee shots that already in big trouble. By eliminating that one pond, Pinehurst #2 will have a legitimate claim as the best course in the world with no water on it.


My friend, Brad Klein, asserts that during the 1999 U.S. Open none of the fairway bunkers were in play. I have thought about that alot, and I can not completly agree, at least with his use of the word "none". Maybe its a matter of semantics. Here is my version:  I would group the bunkers on #2 into three categories: greenside, fairway, and forward.  Regarding forward bunkers, many holes on #2 have bunkers that are 30-80 yards short of the greens, a little too far to be considered greenside and too far to fit my definition of fairway. I figure a bunker needs to be at least 100 yards out to be considered a fairway bunker. These  "forward bunkers" can be found on holes number 1,2,3,5,11,12,14,16, and 18. They are major obstacles for most average players who find themselves faced with that proverbial "toughest shot in golf". However, they are no problem for expert players, who rarely land in one. Almost all of the fairway bunkers are in play for the players who play the course most days.  To prove that point (at least to my satisfaction), I walked the entire course late day before yesterday. My theory was that if there were a fresh rake mark in a bunker, someone had been in the bunker that very day. I found only four fairway bunkers on the entire course which had seen no action that day.

Now to Brad's point about the fairway bunkers not being in play during the  Open.  My definition of being "in play": A bunker influences the club and/or the line chosen by the player. The fairway bunkers on #1 and #2 are NOT in play, except perhaps a few very long hitters on #2 and maybe a few short hitters on #1.  On #3 almost all players hit an iron off the tee to keep it short of the bunker on the right about 100 yards out. On #4, the short-medium hitters had to be wary of the bunker on the left off the tee. There is no fairway bunker on #5 (the toughest hole on the course, and maybe the planet). #6 is a par 3. On #7, like #3, many played short of the cluster of bunkers on the right, although all of them probably could have carried them. The lone fairway bunker on #8 is NOT in play. #9 is a par 3. The small fairway bunker on the right on #10 is NOT in play for anyone, but the fairway bunkers on the left about 110 yards out caused most players to lay-up short of them except for those very long hitters who tried to reach the green on the 600yd hole. #11 has a bunker on the left which is NOT in play. I didn't watch a lot of play on #12, but I have to believe that from the new back tee the bunker on the right must have been a factor for many.
On #13, some players hit driver over the cluster of bunkers on the right, but many hit a fairway wood or iron to the left.
I suppose the bunkers on #14 and #16 were a factors for only some of the field. The lone bunker on #18 is NOT in play.

I would not object to adding a total of 3 or 4 bunkers on holes where the existing bunkers are not in play for the touring pros, but I would oppose moving existing bunkers which play an important role for most players. Given the fact that only one player broke par in the 1999 Open, I really don't see any need to change the course for the 2005 Open, and I sure would not change it for the "regular" players.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Crusty"  Jim
Freelance Curmudgeon

Hart Huffines

Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2002, 01:30:45 PM »
Jim,

If you had been able to witness "one of golf's most
beloved figures" going two under from hole #5 through
#11 you might feel differently.  Hope you get back to
playing soon.

Ran,

Did I miss something or are you yet to post on the
outcomes between you and Ted.

Thanks guys...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

jim_lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What would Ross do to No. 2 today?
« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2002, 01:36:26 PM »
Hart:
I have seen that guy play. He is not that good!

I am recovering well from my surgery and should be back on the course in a couple of weeks.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Crusty"  Jim
Freelance Curmudgeon

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back