[Jud_T]

I'm willing to bet it won't be "too easy" for the Open, whatever that means.  Those greens are sick.  Speed them up to 12 and watch the fun commence.  Also, I like the idea of watching the pros have to make a decision about how much risk they're going to take out of the wire grass as opposed to just hacking out of the rough.  The tournament might very well come down to a miracle shot that someone hits out of the wire grass or a shot that doesn't come off from a guy who tries to bite off too much.  I also think that the commentators and at least some of the players will find it a positive change and an interesting challenge which differs from their usual setup.  My guess is many of the best, most creative players will love it.  Of course there will always be the whiners; guys who didn't play well or made poor decisions and try to blame it on the course.  Frankly, this is the Major I'm most looking forward to.

[Rich Goodale]

Hi RJ. Good questions. Are those photos of No. 2 Course? I bet not. I can tell you for sure that kind of clumping is not what they are going for on No. 2. What they are doing at other courses is a different topic, is it not?
But how that is going to be worked on No. 2 is a great question. How they render that is very important. Consider this photo:



It's going to be a challenge to play a good shot from there - but if you pull off a very good stroke you are still in the hole. That's very different from just being dead. Some shots you may not be given much to work with - but you are usually going to be given something to work with. Ross wanted to give you a chance to redeem yourself rather than just punishing you. Very protestant. You'll have to be creative and pull off something very good though. But that's just desserts for hitting it in there. It won't be predictable/bland/unadventurous.
Regarding the different kinds of grasses I'm not a horticulturist. I had some friends in college who could go into great detail about different kinds of grasses but I don't know too much about that. As far as No. 2 goes, my understanding is that they are using wire grass mainly. I think they are going for interesting playability. I would imagine they would end up with some areas which are less congenial than others but do you think zero playability is what Ross or Coore/Crenshaw would be after? Certainly not.
They will have to give the matter consideration. If anyone is not pleased with what they are doing then good luck to you is all I'll say.

Hi Rich, yes what you were saying makes sense in that context. I didn't think you meant it how it first looked to me. I agree with you that how it's presented is important. A non-natural pruned look that's not well placed is not appealing to me either. So they've got their work cut out presenting it well. They will. It will take some time and everything is not going to be perfect all the time - but they will do it really well. I have confidence in the ultimate outcome.
Gotta run. More fun to play this time of day because no one's in our way. There's little doubt I'll be exploring some native areas. Still, it's the best game going whether I'm hitting it well or not.

Thanks for that pciture, Crhis.  It brings back nightmares to me of the 8th at Cypress Point.  My average score on my two bites of that cherry is 6 strokes, and as I birdied it the first time, you might be able to guess what my score was the second time when my "power fade" had more fade than power.....

IMHO, Cypress (and maybe Pinehurst) might want to see if they can replicate the experience of the best links courses (in normal conditions) where the rough looks super gnarly but plays much easier than it looks.  Part of the "solution" might be to have the native grasses sitting on some sort of turf rather than pure sand.  That's the very often achieved ideal in Scotland, at lest.  Why not Pinehurst or Monterey?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Having played # 2 for over 50 years, I saw, with dismay, the narrowing of the fairways for the US Open.

My dad had been playing # 2 competitively since the 30's, when they had oil based sand greens.

Returning the fairways to their intended widths is more of a maintenance, rather than an architectural issue.
It's a rather simple decision, a management decision, not requiring a high degree of architectural talent

It's A project which almost anyone could have managed with the aid of old aerial photos.

The question I have is:     To what year was a restoration effort targeted ?

[rjsimper]

Let's be clear about one thing...the "tips" as Ben is relating are almost assuredly the 6900 tees...the back set they put out for resort play. That's a far cry from the real tips.

All waste areas are played through the green. Their definition of "what is a bunker?" is if the back edge is surrounded by grass. If there is grass on all sides, it's a bunker.

I believe the course is easier with the changes.

I believe this is a good thing.

I hope they don't get USGA'd into changing too much about it, or keeping it that way post-open.

I believe the next 2 opens more than any in the last decade depend on weather and a general lack of rain to produce typical US open scores.

[Ronald Montesano]

I'll follow a Middlebury B.A. with a Middlebury M.A. perspective...

Bravo for mentioning the "tips" point. I'd follow it up with all the trappings that accompany a national open championship, none of which involves a bunch of guys chilling together, with no comparable competitive pressure. Ben, I hope that you trust your friends forever and that they never let you down. I don't agree that the course they played is the course that will host the 2014 national open championships.

Bravo for insinuating, Ryan, that this course is not about two weeks in 2014. Does Augusta National play the same after the Masters concludes? No, it does not. I suspect it plays easier for the members, beginning with the tee placement. Well, let's hope that Ryan is correct and that the shadow of national open championships does not destroy a restorative effort that should and properly affect the tens of thousands of golfers who will play a Ross course, not a faux-Ross course.

[hhuffines]

I played there with some good young players last week and agree with Stan about the greens.   That's where the best players are tested and they just aren't firm and fast right now.  I also agree with Craig on patience with the scrub areas.  They are still planting and working with the USGA on the presentation. 

[astavrides]

.

[Craig Disher]

Chris, thanks for catching and then advancing the spirit of the thread.

Actually, not only do I not really care about the opens -- *except* for how it may lead to permanently damaged presentation -- I'm only a little concerned about scoring. They'll make it crazy long and shine the greens and then paraphrasing Chip it will become a game of hit it *here* or else. Chip's point indirectly supports my argument: isn't the point of the design to let every class of golfer enjoy a round while challenging the golfer looking to post a score?

I'm more interested/concerned in/about the intrinsic playability of the waste areas for multiple classes of golfers: Ben's anecdote shows it could be easier for good golfers and harder for worse. Opposite of ideal!

Yes, Craig, let's wait for the grow-in but it sounds like all that will do is make it as hard for the good as for the mediocre. 

The added width is great, great news. How does it interact with the other main change--what's the impact of width and waste acting together?

In carrying balls out to the waste areas, does it actually serve to narrow the course? (Wouldn't The Masters be harder if they eliminated the rough so balls could roll into the trees?)

Mark - I think we're just poles apart on your premise. If we can agree that the waste areas are evolving as the wire grass becomes dominant (compare Chris's photo to RJ Daley's of mature wire grass) it sure appears that by 2014 the players will value the fairway much more than in 2005. The compensation for the added penalty (ok, it's not that penal now but let's give it a couple of years) is the added fairway width which I believe actually improves the game for the mediocre player. I played a lot with mid-handicappers and saw how they suffered with the rough. Trying to work a consistent slice to the middle of a 20-yard fairway wasn't easy and playing out of the rough almost always added 2-3 strokes to the hole.

I don't get the "hit it here or else" point. Generous fairways have favorable and unfavorable areas to play to - quite different than the penal setup on the old course where the tee shot options narrow fairway or rough. That sounds more like a "hit it here or else" setup.

[Ben Sims]

Just to clarify my anecdote.  Tim made sure to emphasize that they played from the competitive tips, i.e. the set of tees that the resort calls the "US Open" tees.  The resort lists them at 7495, I would imagine the played it a bit less than that as a golf course is rarely "tipped out.".  

These guys were all D1 golfers at one point, so "not playing much" to them means something different than for the rest of us.  I would say they all play 3-5 times/month, with very little practice time.

Again, this was just one group of guys' observation.  But there is no reason to belittle their experience by twisting the facts.  They played it long, and found the course--in their opinion--much easier than it would have been with rough.

I will reiterate, that I am a huge fan of the native area that Pinehurst is going after with this renovation.  It reminds me of the move to "zero-scaping" in Arizona and New Mexico.  It will save water, create less headaches from a maintenance perspective, and provide an element of playability that is missing from all but a handful of courses.  

[Chris Buie]

Ben, I'm not trying to rough you up but did someone "belittle their experience by twisting the facts"?
I just read through your friends experience and it looks like he is advocating standard rough areas rather than the sandy/native plant areas. Is that right or did I misread that?
Anyway, come down and have a go at it when you get the chance. I bet you'll love it.

I thought you guys may appreciate this photo of Hogan tangling with a sandy area on the course. I think C/C were going for the late 30's/early 40's look and playability. As you know, Ross doted on the course and it was almost certainly refined far beyond any of his other courses. He had the feedback from many years experience from both the pros who played the North-South every year and from the more average player. By the 40's he had it just like he thought it was supposed to be and that's what I think C/C tried to reinstall.

[Mark Bourgeois]

I need to think more about these posts but before one line of discussion goes too far: please everyone STOP discussing the changes in the context of the professional game of "golf"!

Pat M: check out the link in the thread on Craig Disher's contribution -- the Southwest Airlines article.

[Joe_Tucholski]

It's A project which almost anyone could have managed with the aid of old aerial photos.

The question I have is:     To what year was a restoration effort targeted ?

Patrick from the article in this thread (http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?topic=53380.0) it looks like they used aerials found by Craid Disher from Christmas day 1943.  The intended period of time they wanted to bring the course back to was "between its hosting the 1936 PGA Championship and Ross’ death in 1948."

Edit:  Looks like Mark beat me to the answer.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chris,

Great photo.

Do you have any others depicting the "off" areas.

Since three (3) generations of the Tufts family controlled Pinehurst From inception to 1970, you have to wonder how and why the "off" areas transitioned to rough from their native state.

The Tufts family was also intimately involved with the USGA and were golfers.

Was the transition part of a trend ?

Was the transition financially driven ?

And, whose idea was it to return the "off" areas to their former native state ?

[Dean DiBerardino]

Pat:

When I worked at Pinehurst, I remember hearing that Diamondhead Corporation, who purchased Pinehurst from the Tufts family back in the 70's, was responsible for most of the transition. They were responsible for the removal of the "natural" roughs with the native grasses as well as most of the bunkering and mounding that was there at the time. I remember hearing that they were looking for a "wall to wall" green look like Augusta. Chris Buie can probably confirm/deny this.

Also, ClubCorp began to bring back some of the old features of No. 2 back in the 80's when they purchased it from Diamondhead.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

When I worked at Pinehurst, I remember hearing that Diamondhead Corporation, who purchased Pinehurst from the Tufts family back in the 70's, was responsible for most of the transition. They were responsible for the removal of the "natural" roughs with the native grasses as well as most of the bunkering and mounding that was there at the time. I remember hearing that they were looking for a "wall to wall" green look like Augusta. Chris Buie can probably confirm/deny this.

Dean,

I have my doubts about attributing the removal of the "natural" roughs to Diamondhead.
I think they vanished long before Diamondhead acquired the property.

I played Pinehurst pre and post Diamondhead and don't recall very much in the way of changes on/to the golf course when they acquired it.

Also, ClubCorp began to bring back some of the old features of No. 2 back in the 80's when they purchased it from Diamondhead.

[Tony Ristola]

Seems like the sandy expanses play a bit like pot luck; they can always add more wire grass if it seems they are too predictable/easy (and remove it after the tournament too). Or add pine straw to provide unpredictable lies.

The Hogan photo looks like the sand was soft. Are the sandy expanses today hard packed or soft?

[William_G]

Sandy waste areas do not "properly" punish misses per Strategic School of Design. One of two scenarios:
1) Ball runs out so far that penalty for being out of position on subsequent shot is reduced / negated by short distance needed to hit shot -- this distance much shorter than when area was rough (even if it were fairway?);
2) Ball runs into wire grass allowing for no recovery shot, just a hack back out to fairway.

Therefore, resolved: the course loses some -- a lot? How much? -- of what made it one of the world's greatest Strategic School designs.

Mark,

I don't think anything was lost as the bermuda offered no strategic element except avoidance.

The restoration of a more natural setting allows for the strategic design to play out within that more natural setting which is what its all about.

Thanks

[Tom_Doak]

I have yet to see the changes to the course but I am looking forward with great anticipation.  There was a time 25 years ago when the rough at Pinehurst was thinner and the fairways wider and you had all the strategy and a lot of variety, but that was long gone the last time I was there.  Two points:

1.  One trouble with sandy-waste roughs is that in a warm-season climate, you are always fighting them getting contaminated with bermuda, and getting thicker.  Not only are the lies randomly different, but it also changes over the seasons and over time; you can't just set the mower at two inches and keep it the same.  This is a difficult problem for a superintendent, and for anyone who desires to set up the course with particular penalty values in mind.

2.  There is a small contingent of naysayers regarding the renovation because it goes against the status quo of the golf business ... irrigation designers are not happy about the single row system, for example, and keep telling everybody within earshot that it will be a failure, because if everybody did it this way, they'd be out of a job.  So, consider your sources carefully when you hear things about Pinehurst, and if you can, try to get there and judge for yourself.

[William_G]

played there before and after, and is definitely more fun with the C&C renovation/restoration

definitely will offer variation when you hit it offline etc... but that's what it is supposed to be like

nature is variable and golf is a design within nature

wall to wall bermuda was boring at best

[John Jeffreys]

The best description of the difference between wiregrass and love grass is that you can lose a golf ball in wiregrass, you can lose a golf bag in love grass. That was from Mr. Coore.

[Chris Buie]

Great photo.

Do you have any others depicting the "off" areas.

Patrick, when you are referring to off areas of Pinehurst do you mean the off road areas where your dad and Walter Hagan went riding in the Duesenberg or the areas off the fairways? I'll assume you mean the latter. Here are some vintage photos (not all of No. 2) which show how the plant was integrated into the courses - all courtesy of the Tufts Archives.

Was the transition part of a trend?

I think it was at least in part a symptom of the "Augusta Syndrome". That is, people wanted it to be lush because they were hypnotized by the Masters broadcasts. Wall to wall green velvet was and still is considered by many to be the height of maintaining a course. There is probably more to the transition than that though. I'd have to look into it a bit more to give you a better answer.
Asperity (rough or rugged) is a quality which comes in and out of vogue in various cultures at different times. At the moment I suppose you could say in golf there is something of a trend away from a man made sensibility and toward a more natural aesthetic. I've read through some materials which gave a considerable amount of thought to the matter - outside but relevant to golfing. From what I gathered one of the main ideas was that being overly immersed in a man made industrial world ultimately diminished the vitality of the individual - with the experience of the natural world being a necessary antidote for providing balance and well being. A child that grows up entirely in the concrete canyons of the city is not necessarily destined to be the healthiest of individuals. For the culture to be healthy it would need to provide accessibility to a more natural environment. Deprivation in that regard (and other regards) is going to be problematic - and expensive. It would be nice if golf complexes provided caddy programs which those kids could enlist in. They would get some exercise, get some money, be in a healthy environment and learn how to behave. That is a trend I would love to see.
So, going sideways with the conversation again. Pat in particular knows how I get sidetracked. 

Was the transition financially driven?

I'm not entirely sure but it is most likely true that was an element of the thinking - possibly the key element. I do know for sure that when they neutered the bunkers of No. 2 (right after Ross passed away) it was financially driven. They did a lot of unfortunate things right after Ross quit the stage. It's almost like they'd wanted to do it for some time but would not dare to challenge his decisions regarding the courses while he was present. The middle years of the resort certainly saw many dramatic transitions. I typed an IMO about the beginning of the resort and will probably get around to attempting to paint some sort of picture of those middle years. That North-South trifle I posted a while back was the first part.

And, whose idea was it to return the "off" areas to their former native state?

Apparently, it was mainly Don Padgett - the president of the resort. What a great legacy. His father was a top guy at Pinehurst as well and left an equally fabulous legacy - acquiring the nation's championship. When he was brought to Pinehurst he was given one assignment: get the U.S. Open.
So the Padgett family have been exemplary custodians of the resort. The world would be a much better place if other worthy places received such elevated guardianship.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chris,

Any chance you can date those photos ?

Is that the Padgett that came from Firestone ?

Quite a legacy.

[Chris Buie]

Yes, both of the Padgetts came from Firestone. Pinehurst owner Bob Dedman should receive considerable credit for the restoration as well.

If I remember correctly the first and last photos were from 1938. The other photos were definitely much earlier. The color photo is contemporary.

[Matthew Petersen]

Just to clarify my anecdote.  Tim made sure to emphasize that they played from the competitive tips, i.e. the set of tees that the resort calls the "US Open" tees.  The resort lists them at 7495, I would imagine the played it a bit less than that as a golf course is rarely "tipped out.".  

These guys were all D1 golfers at one point, so "not playing much" to them means something different than for the rest of us.  I would say they all play 3-5 times/month, with very little practice time.

Again, this was just one group of guys' observation.  But there is no reason to belittle their experience by twisting the facts.  They played it long, and found the course--in their opinion--much easier than it would have been with rough.

I will reiterate, that I am a huge fan of the native area that Pinehurst is going after with this renovation.  It reminds me of the move to "zero-scaping" in Arizona and New Mexico.  It will save water, create less headaches from a maintenance perspective, and provide an element of playability that is missing from all but a handful of courses.  

Obviously these friends are very good golfers, but surely they're also aware that the green firmess and hole locations for resort play would be nothing like how it will set up for a US Open. I think what will make the Open fun is that a player in the sandy area will have a chance to get the ball on or up near the green. Sometimes moreso sometimes less, but more likely than if the USGA just grew 5" rough. Then you have guys going for it but not having the control they would from the fairway, which kleads to guys missing where you don't want to miss, and as we all know that's when the fun really starts at Pinehurst.

Also, given the apparent talent level of these guys I'd say the course is probably in the sweet spot for a US Open. Their scores wouldn't keep them around for the weekend at a US Open and that's before the course is dried out.

[Mike Hendren]

I don't think anything was lost as the bermuda offered no strategic element except avoidance.

One might argue that avoidance is the only de facto strategy left in today's game.

Bogey

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()