[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm sure that additional tree removal would help in certain locations, but, as I examined the holes two things, or actually one thing stood out, but, on three holes.

If the trees behind # 17 were removed, it would be a sensational "skyline" green, which I believe it was when it was first crafted.

Ditto # 2.

I think the same thing about # 9's left side green.

I know that idiot-savant, TEPaul. claims that the trees behind the left side 9th green are necessary for bank stabilization, but, I don't accept that those particular trees are the only method of bank stabilization.

And, some of those trees are on top of the bank.

Someone posted an early photo of the 9th green showing it as a 'skyline" green.
If they could repost it on this thread it would help.

# 9 requires a far longer approach shot than # 17, which is basically a wedge or short iron, so the fear factor isn't as high as the shorter distance and club used for the approach somewhat ameliorates the fear.

But, on # 9, the fear factor would be incredibly high for two reasons.
1.  the longer shot is more difficult to control and makes a back hole location ferocious.
2.  Everyone knows the consequence of going long and it's frightening.

# 2 lies somewhere between # 9 and # 17 regarding the fear factor.

This one act, restoring the "skyline" feature on those three holes, would improve the play of the golf course without any substantive intrusion on the play of the golf course.

[Kalen Braley]

Pat,

By saying "additional tree removal", you are implying that it was previously done at some point in time.    

Based on what I can see in photos, todays PV looks nothing like the PV of original state.

P.S.  I don't buy the stabilization argument.  There are hundreds of exposed sand-base courses worldwide who figure out how to make it work.  I'm guessing Pine Valley wouldn't have a problem either.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

It poured on Friday afternoon and evening.

You could see the erosive effect of that downpour on the golf course.

The bank behind # 9 is exceptionally steep and would surely wash or be eroded away without plantings.
I just don't think the plantings have to be huge pines which eliminate the skyline effect.
I'm with you in that I think PV could figure it out in a heartbeat.

There's been a good deal of tree removal over the last 5 or so years.
All for the better.
I've always advocated returning PV to it's state as represented in aerials from the late 20's and early 30's.

I first played the golf course in 1964 and it was noticeably different.

I just think more could be done, especially behind those three greens.

I also think that tree removal would make wind more of a factor and the WIND is one of the greatest assets a golf course can have.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,

It poured on Friday afternoon and evening.

You could see the erosive effect of that downpour on the golf course.

The bank behind # 9 is exceptionally steep and would surely wash or be eroded away without plantings.
I just don't think the plantings have to be huge pines which eliminate the skyline effect.
I'm with you in that I think PV could figure it out in a heartbeat.

There's been a good deal of tree removal over the last 5 or so years.
All for the better.
I've always advocated returning PV to it's state as represented in aerials from the late 20's and early 30's.

I first played the golf course in 1964 and it was noticeably different.

I just think more could be done, especially behind those three greens.

I also think that tree removal would make wind more of a factor and the WIND is one of the greatest assets a golf course can have.

Pat,

For perhaps the one and only time in GCA history, we are in complete agreeance on every point.

Lets work hard to make sure it never happens again!! 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

You know I'll do my part, you just better make sure you work hard to do yours.

Have you consulted with TEPaul lately ?

[Jim Franklin]

Are the trees on #17 there to shield that green from tee shots on #10? Or even to keep the tee on #11 secluded from the 17th green? Just asking. Now tree removal on #2 would be great. As for #9, the tree removal would not lead to the desired skyline effect IMHO because the 10th tee is right there behind it.

[Sean Leary]

Are the trees on #17 there to shield that green from tee shots on #10? Or even to keep the tee on #11 secluded from the 17th green? Just asking. Now tree removal on #2 would be great. As for #9, the tree removal would not lead to the desired skyline effect IMHO because the 10th tee is right there behind it.

I think so. A bunch of trees were taken out between 10 green and 18 tee box between my 2 trips there but some remain.
2 has had a ton of trees removed but could certainly use more. 12 is the other one where it would benefit, IMO, but othere than that, tree removal would be minor improvements to holes, not major like on those 2.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Are the trees on #17 there to shield that green from tee shots on #10?

No, the two big pines are on the right side of the back of # 17 green, not the left side.

Or even to keep the tee on #11 secluded from the 17th green?

No, those are flanking trees, not backround trees.

Just asking.

Now tree removal on #2 would be great.

Agreed, and it would be easy to accomplish.

As for #9, the tree removal would not lead to the desired skyline effect IMHO because the 10th tee is right there behind it.

Jim, I think you're confusing your greens.

There is NOTHING behind the left 9th green

[Scott Warren]

Patrick,

I managed to dig up some old pics of both the 2nd and 17th holes to illustrate your point about the skyline greens.

The pic immediately below looks eerily similar to Jon Spaulding's swing, and a white visor to boot!

2nd:


17th:

[Mark Pearce]

Great pics, Scott.  Whilst all pictures of Pine Valley look great, I can't help feeling that the older pictures are pictures of a better golf course, with fewer trees and a wilder, less kempt look.

[Mark_F]

Whilst all pictures of Pine Valley look great, I can't help feeling that the older pictures are pictures of a better golf course, with fewer trees and a wilder, less kempt look.

They obviously planted trees because they had the foresight to realise they would need them to hide the fans.

[Lawrence Largent]

I'd like to see the course kept more firm and fast.  A lot of the second shots beg for a sweeping draw like the 4th and 13th that come to mind.  The times I've played the course it was very soft and I asked the caddie if it ever firmed up and he said rarely.  I ask the question have they slipped into wanting the course to look to green?

Lawrence

[Bill Brightly]

When I played it, I wondered if they spend a great dea of time clearing the underbrush. Beyond just tree removal, I would think they have a great task in simply fighting back the underbrush along each hole to keep it playable. Or do they like it thick to really penalize errant shots?

[Sean Leary]

I'd like to see the course kept more firm and fast.  A lot of the second shots beg for a sweeping draw like the 4th and 13th that come to mind.  The times I've played the course it was very soft and I asked the caddie if it ever firmed up and he said rarely.  I ask the question have they slipped into wanting the course to look to green?

Lawrence

Really?

I have played it twice in April when theoretically it should be at its wettest and it was very firm and fast...

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'd like to see the course kept more firm and fast. 

I think everyone agrees with you on that.

A lot of the second shots beg for a sweeping draw like the 4th and 13th that come to mind. 

Yikes, a sweeping draw on # 4 ?
That wouldn't be my choice, but a lot depends upon where your tee shot ends up, on top of the hill or at the base of the hill.
Most prefer a running shot short.  I don't, I'd prefer to be past the flagstick, putting back uphill.
That shot cost me my match on Sunday, when I wanted to fly an iron into the green 10 yards short of the flagstick and my caddy wanted me to land 20 yards short of the green.  I went, uncomfortably with his suggestion, hit a bit of a cut that stayed right and above the hole resulting in a 3-putt.  Had I hit my shot, I would have had a 20 footer uphill where the chance of 3-putting was much lower.

The times I've played the course it was very soft and I asked the caddie if it ever firmed up and he said rarely. 

I think alot depends upon the time of year you play there.
In the Spring, almost NOTHING in the Northeast is fast and firm.

In the summer, it's temperature and humidity related.

Fall golf is when most Northeast couses are at their firmest and fastest.

I wonder how much influence, different strains of grass have on F&F ?

I ask the question have they slipped into wanting the course to look to green?

I don't believe so.
I would think that they'd want the best playing conditions possible given the weather and weather trends.
It poured raining all afternoon and early evening on Friday, and the course was a joy to play on Saturday.
Fast and Firm ?  Not quite, but, very good.

Mother Nature will trump man every time and you just have to live with being protective of Mother Nature's extreme behavior.

Lawrence

[Patrick_Mucci]

When I played it, I wondered if they spend a great dea of time clearing the underbrush. Beyond just tree removal, I would think they have a great task in simply fighting back the underbrush along each hole to keep it playable. Or do they like it thick to really penalize errant shots?

Bill,

They've done a good job at clearing a lot of the underbrush and trees.

Air circulation is much better.

Some of the isolation is gone, but, it's gone for the better.

[Kalen Braley]

I'd be curious...if you showed these two pics to a non GCA'er without any explanation...would they even be able to guess that they are the same golf hole?

Then....




And now...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

If I'd shown those pictures to you or most of the GCA.com'ers they wouldn't have known it's the same hole.

The lower picture appears to have been taken from below the tee, not on it.
Either that, or the photographer was a midget.

[Bill Brightly]

When I played it, I wondered if they spend a great dea of time clearing the underbrush. Beyond just tree removal, I would think they have a great task in simply fighting back the underbrush along each hole to keep it playable. Or do they like it thick to really penalize errant shots?

Bill,

They've done a good job at clearing a lot of the underbrush and trees.

Air circulation is much better.

Some of the isolation is gone, but, it's gone for the better.

I played it earlier this year and one thing that struck me is that Pine Valley is in the midst of a thriving pine forest. I certainly am not a botanist, but it seems to me that a pine forest is a fast growing forest, one that must constantly be cut back, one that would gladly erase the golf course if it could , far more so than hardwoods. This probably requires a continuing maintenance effort that we would not normally think about.

[Carl Rogers]

What yardage do the back tees now play to?  Are they long enough to hold a National Amateur event?

How would a LPGA Event do there?  Would the winner be +10?

[Patrick_Mucci]

What yardage do the back tees now play to? 


7,057 par 70

Are they long enough to hold a National Amateur event?

I think so, and, they could make it longer on certain holes from the back tees.
The regular tees are 6,532 par 70.

How would a LPGA Event do there? 


I think under optimal competitive conditions that they'd struggle.

I think the GAP Open was held there recently.
Perhaps TEPaul could let us know the results.

The course gets exponentially more difficult as it gets fast and firm.

There are a lot of built in barriers that reign in distance

Would the winner be +10?

290 ?  Easily, I think.

It's a difficult medal play golf course at par 70.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()