[Jimmy Muratt]

Below is a link from the "Pinehurst Golfer" website regarding word that C&C has been hired to do some work on #2.  This is potentially very exciting news:

http://tinyurl.com/yjeh73b

Question is, what would you like to see done to the course?

I think the rough lines definitely need to be addressed.  They have pinched the course in numerous spots and diminished the use of angles that makes approaching those greens so interesting.  Also, I'd like to see a lot less green grass and more native areas.  They have such wonderful soil and native grasses there, utilize them.  It would be great to see some exposed sandy areas on the course, they would present interesting recovery options and really enhance the course aesthetically.

[Paul Jones]

I am looking forward to seeing what they do.  I have only played the coures once and it was a long time ago and have been wanting to make a trip back.  Did the article say when it was suppose to be completed?

[Tom_Doak]

That's great news ... the golf course is badly in need of attention.

[PCCraig]

Very cool report!

The big thing that needs to be taken care of are the rough lines...otherwise all I can think of would be the look of the course. I agree that it could look a little more scruffy and natural to the area.

For the daily player and golfer this really is fantastic, however problem for Pinehurst and the USGA would be how much of the rough to remove...would it make the course a little too easy for the pros?

[Phil Benedict]

That's great news ... the golf course is badly in need of attention.

I'm sure this is true but I find it rather amazing that the resort could let this happen to their cash cow.  Just as a business matter #2 should be beyond reproach.  Maybe they think that hosting multiple US Opens is enough to maintain the course's (and the resort's) cache.

[Ben Stephens]

Thank god they did not get Rees or Fazio to do No.2 - Ben Crenshaw is one of the greatest putters ever and his understanding of greens/short game areas will be hugely benefical to No.2. I agree and I hope they bring back some of those sandy waste areas to make the course look more natural.

[Sean Leary]

Have C and C done a lot of renovations to Top Courses?

[Jimmy Muratt]

Sean,

Their most recent renovation work includes Prairie Dunes and Wykagyl.

[PCCraig]

Have C and C done a lot of renovations to Top Courses?

Hopefully it's not a "renovation" and mostly a tweaking of what is already there. They sure can't make it any longer, and you wouldn't want to touch the greens...

[Ben Stephens]

Has anyone got an old aerial photo or photos of No. 2?

Cheers

Ben

[Dean DiBerardino]

Good to hear!  Too bad for Rees, Jack & Tom

[Chuck Brown]

That's great news ... the golf course is badly in need of attention.

I remember your posting on your complaints with Number 2.  Having played the course many times, and over many years, I had just thought of it as a great track; a real gem.  Then, reading your post made me think, "Hey, that's true.  How much better the course could be if they did that..."
I wish I could locate that post of yours.  I hope C&C give you a call, or read what you wrote.
Tom, do you think that the course got messed up after the Confidential Guide came out?  Was it in relation to the Opens there?

[Eric Smith]

That's great news ... the golf course is badly in need of attention.

I remember your posting on your complaints with Number 2.  Having played the course many times, and over many years, I had just thought of it as a great track; a real gem.  Then, reading your post made me think, "Hey, that's true.  How much better the course could be if they did that..."
I wish I could locate that post of yours.  

I think this is the one you're referring to Chuck... http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35750.msg724005/

[tlavin]

I would imagine they'll remove a fair amount of fairway grass and expose more of the sandy subsurface.  I'm sure it would look better and play better.

[rjsimper]

Does anyone honestly think they'll address the rough lines (and by GCA standards I read this to mean widening the fairways) considering they are in the US Open rota now? Or at least, if they are addressed, that the USGA won't re-narrow them?

[Craig Disher]

The fairways are mostly kept to the same width they were during the US Open. With some of Ross's fairway bunkers now 10-15 into the rough the course is just a slog until you get to the greens. I understand that there is a segment of the golfing market that wants to play the course just like it was for the pros but I doubt they would feel cheated if fairway bunkers were brought back into play.

The rough - especially if wet - is a misery. The 419 Bermuda is fine bladed and thick and if it's left at more than a couple inches actually can make a ball disappear. But as bad as it is, it poses much less a problem for the pros than the average low-hcp resort guest. The lies are consistent and the pros are just plain good. OTOH, the areas with sand and wire grass ARE a problem for the pros. A good lie, even a great lie, is possible, but within an inch or two of the perfect lie is an impossible one. Sandy, scruffy areas surrounding the fairways would put a greater premium on accuracy. And it would be interesting once in a while to see a ball roll into a fairway bunker rather than disappearing into bermuda rough.  I am not a fan of the wall-to-wall grass at #2.  I'm hoping this is what C&C are looking at.

[Sean Leary]

Would the sandy scruffy areas be restoring what it was in the past?

[Chuck Brown]

That's great news ... the golf course is badly in need of attention.

I remember your posting on your complaints with Number 2.  Having played the course many times, and over many years, I had just thought of it as a great track; a real gem.  Then, reading your post made me think, "Hey, that's true.  How much better the course could be if they did that..."
I wish I could locate that post of yours.  

I think this is the one you're referring to Chuck... http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35750.msg724005/

That's it Eric!  Thank you!  I just re-read it, and it might be even more interesting now, in light of events, than before!

[I don't know why I couldn't get Search to work for me...  Many thanks to you.]

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

This is exciting news Jimmy  See you at Mountain Lake soon

[Craig Disher]

Would the sandy scruffy areas be restoring what it was in the past?

Kind of. I've seen many photos taken in the 1930s - before and after the conversion to grass greens - and the areas off the fairways do look scruffier. It's not the regularized scruffiness that has been added off the fairways on 8 and 11 e.g. but it's not managed rough either. I've also seen the work at the Dormie Club and I came away thinking that that was the appropriate, natural setup for a course in the sandhills. It's too much to hope that the Resort would go completely in that direction but any steps towards widening the fairways and replacing rough with sand and wire grass would be an improvement.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Below is a link from the "Pinehurst Golfer" website regarding word that C&C has been hired to do some work on #2. 
This is potentially very exciting news:

Jimmy, why is it exciting news ?
I think it's bad news.
Did you not read and understand the purpose of the intended work, to narrow the fairways and grow wirery rough ?
Why is that good news ?
Another course will fall victim to more tinkering in order to prepare it for the U.S. Open.
How is that good or exciting news ?

http://tinyurl.com/yjeh73b

Question is, what would you like to see done to the course?

NOTHING, except widen the fairways back to their original width.

I think the rough lines definitely need to be addressed.  They have pinched the course in numerous spots and diminished the use of angles that makes approaching those greens so interesting. 

Also, I'd like to see a lot less green grass and more native areas. 

How familiar are you with Pinehurst # 2 ?
When did you first play it ?
How many times have you played it ?

If you had to pick a restoration date, what year would that be ?

Were there "native" areas in the 90's, 80's, 70's, 60's, 50's ?

Why would you want to introduce something that was never there if your interest is in restorative work ?
 



They have such wonderful soil and native grasses there, utilize them.  It would be great to see some exposed sandy areas on the course, they would present interesting recovery options and really enhance the course aesthetically.

[Sean_A]

Below is a link from the "Pinehurst Golfer" website regarding word that C&C has been hired to do some work on #2. 
This is potentially very exciting news:

Jimmy, why is it exciting news ?
I think it's bad news.
Did you not read and understand the purpose of the intended work, to narrow the fairways and grow wirery rough ?
Why is that good news ?
Another course will fall victim to more tinkering in order to prepare it for the U.S. Open.
How is that good or exciting news ?

http://tinyurl.com/yjeh73b

Question is, what would you like to see done to the course?

NOTHING, except widen the fairways back to their original width.

I think the rough lines definitely need to be addressed.  They have pinched the course in numerous spots and diminished the use of angles that makes approaching those greens so interesting. 

Also, I'd like to see a lot less green grass and more native areas. 

How familiar are you with Pinehurst # 2 ?
When did you first play it ?
How many times have you played it ?

If you had to pick a restoration date, what year would that be ?

Were there "native" areas in the 90's, 80's, 70's, 60's, 50's ?

Why would you want to introduce something that was never there if your interest is in restorative work ?
 



They have such wonderful soil and native grasses there, utilize them.  It would be great to see some exposed sandy areas on the course, they would present interesting recovery options and really enhance the course aesthetically.

I am with Pat.  Why does it take C&C to put #2 right?  Sounds like a marketing scam to me.

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Craig Disher,

You mentioned the fairway bunkers that are now well into the rough lines, which is a product of "Openizing" the golf course, previously.

Will Pinehurst fall victim to what happened at Oakmont and Baltusrol where the bunkers are moved in to conform to the rough lines ?

That would be a disaster at Pinehurst # 2.

However, I feel it's a distinct possibility.

Another wonderful course will fall victim to being "Openized"

Jimmy, how can that possibly be good or exciting news ?

I wonder how the Tufts family would have allowed the course to be altered for the U.S. Open and if they would have restored the width when the Open left town, instead of leaving the course, like every other U.S. Open course, NARROWER ?  ?  ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thank god they did not get Rees or Fazio to do No.2 - Ben Crenshaw is one of the greatest putters ever and his understanding of greens/short game areas will be hugely benefical to No.2. I agree and I hope they bring back some of those sandy waste areas to make the course look more natural.

Ben,

If the "mission statement" is the same, do you think it makes a substantive difference in terms of which "hired gun" will tackle the project ?

My guess is that the bunkers will be moved in.

If that's the case, will you still deify C&C's work ?

Lastly, I don't care if Crenshaw holed every putt he looked at, why on earth would you touch the greens at # 2 ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Good to hear!  

Dean, why is that good to hear.

When is it ever good to hear that a wonderful golf course will be "Openized" ?

Too bad for Rees, Jack & Tom


Why ?
If the "mission statement" is the same, what difference does it make as to the name of the hired hand ?

Will C&C ruin the inherent values of the golf course by moving the bunkers in to match the narrowed fairway, as was done at Oakmont and Baltusrol, but make it more aesthetically acceptable ?

How is "Openizing" a golf course good or exciting news ?  ?  ?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()