Pine Valley and the pimple

« **on:** December 22, 2009, 09:56:22 PM »

Pat Mucci, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Tom Paul, please rejoin the site.

Gosh it is fun reading old articles. This from the April 6, 1928 edition of the Evening Public Ledger.

And here are the pics that went with the article:

« **Reply #1 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:03:09 PM »

Joe - I remember playing the "Pimple" green in the mid 50's.

« **Reply #2 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:03:48 PM »

Very interesting.

And Pine Valey used to carpet their greens. Wow.

« **Reply #3 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:14:10 PM »

Joe - Maybe they brought it back as an experiment for history sake, but I remember that round .

« **Reply #4 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:16:44 PM »

Joe,

Great find yet again. You wonder if Thomas was inspired to build the 6th green at Riviera by the 18th at PV.

« **Reply #5 on:** December 22, 2009, 11:17:40 PM »

The good old days ... when news really was news.

« **Reply #6 on:** December 23, 2009, 09:31:24 AM »

Joe - Nice find. I seem to remember Tom Paul sharing a picture of the pimple on 18. IMO, I see no good reason for it ... after 17.5 holes, I'm pretty beat up by the course, so one less obstacle is just fine with me.

« **Reply #7 on:** December 23, 2009, 10:22:58 AM »

Great article. How do you guys find that kind of info?
I love seeing and reading such articles. If you think about the world we live in and the advances in technology it can be a little daunting, but as we all know common sense goes a long way in the golf industry.

This picture is at the Prairie Club during grassing. In the hat you will find Tyler Swedberg, General Manager and Ross Buckendahl, Director of Agronomy. Just a couple of "Good Ol' Boys". I know I have picture of Tyler on his horse somewhere and Ross is a good ole Husker.
The picture of Pine Valley instantly made me think of the Prairie Club.
I know the Pines Course, by Graham Marsh, will be compared to PV in some aspects.

Saddle Up and check the back nine!

« **Reply #8 on:** December 23, 2009, 10:28:21 AM »

Joe,

There's a great picture of that "pimple" on a seed company's advertisement.

I've long been an advocate of restoring that pimple or a spine in that green, which is large, bland and without much character and challenge. The reinstallation of the pimple would restore the tactical significance of a more precise approach.

As to the article's categorization of the front bunker as "unfair", in what context did they compare that bunker and the DA bunker on # 10 ?

« **Reply #9 on:** December 23, 2009, 10:35:34 AM »

It was seemingly about 20 times the size of the DA and everyball hitting the face would plug...unfair may not be a great word on this site, but avoiding plugged balls in bunkers seems to be a goal every super in the country pursues...

« **Reply #10 on:** December 23, 2009, 11:24:15 AM »

Note also that "3500 small pine trees" were being added at the time. I had been under the (mis-)apprehension that the current surfeit of trees was all natural growth.

Bob

« **Reply #11 on:** December 23, 2009, 11:39:37 AM »

I think Tom has said a few times that the club planted thousands of trees to help "hold it together"...

"Hold it together" could be explained better, but behind #9 was one spot that apparently needed it.

« **Reply #12 on:** December 23, 2009, 11:56:59 AM »

When Jerry Pate and his #1 designer, Steve Pate, designed our new course at Pensacola, he included some really neat "homage" features.

There's a long par 3 (245 tips, 218 blue, 196 white) reverse Redan with a Biarritz swale. There's a 417-455 yard par 4 with a cape tee shot and punchbowl green.

And then there's #13, a 415-445 yard par 4 with no greenside bunkers but a pond left and hairy mound right - and what we call "Jerry's Pimple" right in the middle!

This is a 5,000 SF green that slopes pretty generally toward the water left. The pimple is in the center and is about 10-12" high and about 15' in diameter. You can really be fooled by the slopes coming off that pimple. The hole would be plenty tough enough on its own without the pimple but it does make it interesting every time.

Here's a photo from 100 yards - you may be able to make out the pimple to the right of the pin. It's not as big as the one apparently was at Pine Valley but it can be very frustrating!

« **Reply #13 on:** December 23, 2009, 11:58:39 AM »

Sully - "Holding together" in the sense of preventing erosion?

« **Reply #14 on:** December 23, 2009, 04:08:10 PM »

Two things:

First, I've never been a fan of mounds on a putting surface. Somerset Hills has one on the front nine (#5, I think?) and, even before Stimp speeds of today (I'm that old), I've never cared for it. Too much like clowns' noses and windmills for my taste. Biarritz-type swales (think #2 at PV or #13 at Somerset Hills) or steep fronts (e.g. #'s 16 & 17 at Merion) are testing enough, IMO. I suppose a modest mound (less than 6") provides a fair test but, on greens with today's speeds, having to come down the other side will always result in a longer "come backer" than the architect originally intended. I believe that is extending the "degree of difficulty" too far past "challenging".

Second, they PLANTED TREES AT PINE VALLEY?!?!? Was that really a good idea?

« **Reply #15 on:** December 23, 2009, 09:27:26 PM »

Quote from: Jim Sullivan on December 23, 2009, 11:39:37 AM

I think Tom has said a few times that the club planted thousands of trees to help "hold it together"...

"Hold it together" could be explained better, but behind #9 was one spot that apparently needed it.

Jim, the steep falloff behind # 9 certainly needs stability.

However, I can't imagine that planting pines on that steep a slope would be the best method for preventing erosion.

I have my doubts when it comes to why that steep slope may have been planted in the context of what was planted there.

As to the facing bunker short of the 18th green, and balls burying in the face, it would seem that there were simpler solutions.
I don't know if the article was "ghost" written to justify the removal.
What was TEd Hoyt's relationship with the club or "members of the club ?"

I believe that I initiated a thread on the pimple. and that a picutre of it was included. If someone can research and find the picture and post it, that would help.

Thanks

« **Reply #16 on:** December 23, 2009, 09:31:06 PM »

Chipoat,

You have to understand the tactical function of that pimple in the 18th green.

Without it, you're left with an expansive green that requires no particular degree of accuracy.
The punchbowl like perimeter redirects balls to the center.

That pimple effectively divided that green into quadrants.

Approach shots not hit to the proper quadrant were punished with a more difficult putt.

Recovery shots faced the same dilema.

It's a great feature in THAT green.

P.S. Do you not like the mounds in the 1st, 6th and 12th greens at NGLA ?

« **Reply #17 on:** December 23, 2009, 09:44:38 PM »

Patrick, are these the pictures you were looking for?

I pulled them from your post #154 of this thread:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,38557.msg813138/

Ed

« **Reply #18 on:** December 25, 2009, 02:24:34 PM »

Ed,

Yes, thanks.

I believe there might have been an additional photo that was posted.

That green is presently about 11,070, with a punchbowl like configuration.

Removal of the pimple left the green relatively bland, and devoid of tactical significance regarding an approach and recovery.
The pimple added that element, although it might not have been in an ideal form.

I would favor restoring that pimple or a similar feature, one that would place a premium on accuracy with approach and recoveries.

Without such a feature, the green and approach remain fairly bland.

Notice the dense vegegation on the near bank that extends behind the 9th green.
I would think that that vegetation would promote bank stability more than pine trees.

« **Reply #19 on:** December 25, 2009, 07:56:40 PM »

Patrick, did you play the hole before the pimple was removed?

If so, how did it compare to the carbuncle in the 9th green at Friars Head?

(That was to me bigger than a pimple which I guess would get it up into carbuncle size)

« **Reply #20 on:** December 25, 2009, 10:27:35 PM »

Bill,

I think they're different features in form and function, and the configuration of the two greens are quite dissimilar.

For a good number of years I've played a par 3 with a mound intruding into the left side of the green.
When the hole is cut behind the mound, the approach shot is dramatically different, and harder, than when the hole is cut in front of the mound, and, that's on a green lacking a punchbowl like configuration.

It's clear that Crump always intended that a pimple/spine like feature inhabit that green.

Without it, the green is underwhelming with respect to approach and recovery shots.

And, long putts are of no inordinate challenge, whereas, the restoration of the pimple/spine would create substantial challenge on and to the green.

The second photo seems more enlightening in terms of getting a more thorough perspective on the feature

« **Reply #21 on:** December 26, 2009, 10:47:29 AM »

Is there a difference between Patrick_Mucci and Patrick_Mucci_Jr ?

« **Reply #22 on:** December 26, 2009, 11:47:37 AM »

Quote from: JC Jones on December 26, 2009, 10:47:29 AM

Is there a difference between Patrick_Mucci and Patrick_Mucci_Jr ?

One lives in Florida, the other in Northern New Jersey.

« **Reply #23 on:** July 13, 2011, 09:52:21 PM »

These photos should be of interest.

« **Reply #24 on:** July 13, 2011, 09:56:30 PM »

Sheesh. Enuf Pine Valley already.

News:

Joe Bausch

Willie_Dow

David_Elvins

Willie_Dow

Geoffrey_Walsh

Mike Nuzzo

Dan Boerger

Ron Farris

Patrick_Mucci

JESII

BCrosby

JESII

Bill_McBride

BCrosby

ChipOat

Patrick_Mucci

Patrick_Mucci

Ed Oden

Patrick_Mucci

Bill_McBride

Patrick_Mucci_Jr

JC Jones

Kyle Harris

Patrick_Mucci

Terry Lavin

An Error Has Occurred!