Does the Pinehurst Renaissance...

[Mike Hendren]

benefit the best players and harm the mid-to-high handicappers?

Ran's home page now includes various depictions of the 16th hole at Mid Pines and the restoration that mirrors the work done at Pinehurst #2.  It's stunning. I like it.  

However, is this not first and foremost resort golf, populated with players for whom the sandy barrens are more troublesome than a little rough? Doesn't it make it easier for the wayward bombers to get their short irons on the clubface for a spinning approach?  Was not one of the hallmarks of Ross' work enjoyability?    I sense he viewed golf as much as a recreational game as he did a competitive sport.  

Also, could this work backfire and harm Mid Pines' "brand?"

Opinions please.

Bogey

[hhuffines]

I've been wondering about this myself except from a more selfish standpoint.  The new pics of 16 at Mid Pines depict a reasonable lip between the bunker sand and the fairway which will contain a tee shot and then possibly pose a problem for the second shot.  My recent experiences at Pinehurst #2 indicate the ball could go anywhere, possibly from the sand and out to the fairway.  On the other hand, I really like the new contrast of sand, grass, and pine straw at both courses rather than acres of bermuda.

As for Mid Pines I believe the lack of length will make it more enjoyable for higher handicapers.  As a "tweener" I cant wait to play Mid Pines and find out for myself...

[Greg Holland]

While this is a valid concern, isn't the idea that rather than 35 yard fairways and 30 yards of bermuda rough (which even when short can be quite tough to hit out of in the heat of the summer), having 65 yard fairways with waste areas and bunkers and more strategic decisions on line of play will be more enjoyable for all.

[John Kavanaugh]

On the Digest rankings of best public courses they have this disturbing description of the new #2.

Pinehurst No. 2 has long been considered a great second-shot course because of its convex greens that demand precise iron play. After preparing the course for the 1999 U.S. Open, architect Rees Jones proclaimed No. 2 to be the greatest recovery-shot golf course in America. With Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw re-introducing hardpan rough and distressed turf off every fairway, No. 2 is now a great test of tee shots, too.

Read More http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/2013-02/100-greatest-public-courses#ixzz2I3rfvjm1

[Mike Hendren]

Barney, interesting since I have long held the impression that Ross generally defended par around the greens.

Bogey

[John Kavanaugh]

While I have never met him it is my understanding that Whitten has a great sense of humor.  He may have snuck in a subtle dig at some of the contributors on this site by saying Rees had it right and C&C got it wrong.  Brilliant and subtle.  Now what makes it genius is that the demographic that he serves will think that turning #2 into a great test off the tee is an improvement.

Finest piece of golf writing, by a professional, in years.

[Ronald Montesano]

I don't read it that way at all. The simple "too" mandates that Bill added something to what was already "proclaimed" to be there.

Reread your quote, Juan. If Whitten is poking fun at anyone, it is at Rees. Whitten does not say that P2 is the best recovery-shot golf course in America. He puts the entire weight of that designation on RJ1.

[Nigel Islam]

I think the sand areas are very playable. Its the wire grass that can get you. Its more of a waste area than a fairway bunker. The green complexes at #2 are still going to be where the scoring is. I'm not even sure the sandy areas will be more challenging to pros than 4 inch rough.

[Jason Thurman]

I'm not sure what "brand" Mid Pines really has. It seems to me that it lags a long way behind Pinehurst Resort, Tobacco Road, Pine Needles, and Dormie Club on the list of "courses to play" in the area.

I never really considered playing Mid Pines on my trip to Pinehurst, but with the renovation, I'm certainly more interested in seeing it the next time around. Of course, if every option in Pinehurst moves to the "sandy scrub with no rough" presentation it'll get a little tired, but it's still fairly unique for now. Mid Pines was never going to have the brand recognition that a course like No. 2 has, but I can certainly see it getting some play as a poor man's version (literally).

As far as it being more difficult for high handicappers, I don't know. A lot of high handicappers I know are better from a little rough than from fairway. I'm sure they'll struggle from both wiregrass and hardpan, but I found the sandy scrub areas more visually intimidating than actually difficult to hit from.

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't read it that way at all. The simple "too" mandates that Bill added something to what was already "proclaimed" to be there.

Reread your quote, Juan. If Whitten is poking fun at anyone, it is at Rees. Whitten does not say that P2 is the best recovery-shot golf course in America. He puts the entire weight of that designation on RJ1.

Have you ever played #2?  I have only seen the course before the renovation and it was very relaxing off the tee and terrifying at the greens.  If the course now is also difficult off the tee it has lost it's iconic charm.  If you can't see the irony of a C&C renovation making Pinehurst #2 more difficult off the tee than you have not been paying attention.  And yes, tests are difficult.

Do me a favor and respond in a PM so we don't muck up this thread. 

[Peter Pallotta]

Michael - I can't add anything, but I thought this thread interesting in light of the "Mackenzie composite course" thread, in which you and others included golf holes (like the 8th and 4th at CD) precisely because they are excellent tests of shot making, including drives off the tee. I had always thought that, like Ross, Mackenzie was valued and praised for his ability to create architecture that everyone could enjoy while at the same time testing good players. I have read little evidence that anything in the Pinehurst Renaissance significantly alters/affects this much-beloved formula -- but even if some changes there increase the severity of the shot making tests on a few holes, isn't the overall style/ethos still well in line with that we commend in a thread such as the Mackenzie composite one?

(PS - I think Jason also raises a good point; I'd take my chances on getting a decent lie in -- and succesfully hitting out off -- the scrubby/wirey/hardpanny stuff over 3 inches of rough anytime.)

Peter  

[Steve_Lovett]

Pinehurst #2 maintained fairly narrow fairways until the recent changes and reintroduction of sandy areas. The corridors were wide but the fairways weren't necessarily very wide - and the grass in the rough could be downright thick and lush bermuda. I can remember pulling a drive just a few steps into the rough on the left side of #5 and it made the difference between a gouge-out with no more than an 8-iron (from the rough) and what would've been a clean long-iron (from the fairway).

The removal of grass may look as though it plays with greater difficulty or is a tougher test of driving, but actually unless you're up against clumps of love grass or deep in the trees the play from the sandy areas is usually from pretty hard-packed sand and is a lot easier that from the thick rough.

[Chris Buie]

With Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw re-introducing hardpan rough and distressed turf off every fairway, No. 2 is now a great test of tee shots, too.

So, Whitten is saying it wasn't a test of driving before? Gosh, that is clever. Well, except for the fact he got it wrong. These are the same geniuses that ranked Alotian way ahead of No. 2 and other luminaries?
No further comment necessary.

[John Jeffreys]

Does anyone have a link to the video of today's The Morning Drive where they are discussing the 5 th hole of no. 2? I was at lunch and couldn't hear the television.

[rjsimper]

I think wider fairways and hard-packed sand are much more forgiving to the high handicapper than bermuda rough.

[Matt MacIver]

I think wider fairways and hard-packed sand are much more forgiving to the high handicapper than bermuda rough.

Indeed they are, especially from the fairway. But around the greens the Bermuda is almost easier than the hard-pan. I'd generally prefer more closely-mown areas green side rather than hard-pan, but as a second shot I think it's fine and still unique.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Does anyone have a link to the video of today's The Morning Drive where they are discussing the 5 th hole of no. 2? I was at lunch and couldn't hear the television.

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-EKfRl8k0Qs&h=LAQHhUymMAQGzwyLWpM4yghJ3WOTowZSTwsWBlLtEKfb2RA&s=1

P.S.
I think we may be neighbors.  Next time we're in town I'll be sure to say hello.