Compare Mid Pines and Pine Needles

[Greg Holland]

I heard someone compliment Donald Ross by noting how good but different No. 2, Mid Pines and Pine Needles are - even though they are so close together. Agreed. But then it was said Mid Pines was more demanding and a private championship course with forced carries, elevated greens and no ground game.  On the other hand, it was said Pine Needles was on a broader scale with much more elevation and much more strategy.  Is that accurate?

[Brock Lynch]

Greg,


I've only played Pine Needles once, 5 years ago. Played 3 rounds at Mid Pines including 36 holes a couple of weeks ago. My memory of Pine Needles compared to Mid Pines was that it was broader in scale, but tightened up in the last 4 or 5 holes. Mid Pines has much in the way of elevation change and I don't recall that of Pine Needles. I found Mid Pines to be strategic in that it helps if you can move the ball both ways off the tee and there are times when one side of the fairway gives a better angle into the green. Both courses are very playable and appealed to both my wife and myself. There were not many instances where she couldn't run a ball onto the green on either course. Mid Pines did have quite a few low spots where drainage could be an issue and we played the day after a soaker the night before. When Southern Pines is added to the portfolio, it will be an even greater set of courses under one umbrella.

[Ronald Montesano]

I found no banal holes on MidPines...

[Carl Rogers]

For me, PN just does not come off as well.  Holes 3, 6, 7, 10 & 15 leave me a bit flat.  While holes 5, 8, 9 &14 are very good.


MP, beyond holes 4 & 12 which are outstanding, holes 2, 9, 13 through 17 are very good.  If I had to pick lesser holes at MP, they would be 10 & 11.


I like SP  too.  But at a lower price point, my expectations are lower.


Just IMO.  Please disagree.

[Greg Holland]

First, I love both courses.  However the descriptions in my original post were made my an architecture expert, and I had a hard time squaring those descriptions with my experiences on these courses.  First, they are both on similar terrain with elevation changes (what being across the street from each other and what not).  Second, I think both have plenty of strategic options.   Mid Pines was meant to be a championship course, but it is still very playable even for average golfers – it is hard to lose a ball there.  The only real forced carry is on the short third hole, and while there are elevated greens and many false fronts, there are still ground game options on many holes.  Finally, I find it to be very strategic, with a great, intimate routing and some terrific half par holes.  Pine Needles does have a broader scale and elevation changes, but also more forced carries.  Accordingly, I was curious how the tree house would describe them, and whether others agreed with the descriptions by the "expert" (admittedly broad-brushed) and I just missed the boat?

[Tim Martin]

When Southern Pines is added to the portfolio, it will be an even greater set of courses under one umbrella.

+1
Brock-I think you can play the three in a trip and decide which one you like the best. Guaranteed almost everyone is going to like all of them.

[Kevin Pallier]

I prefer MP over PN.

The former has more interesting holes and requires a bit more strategy to play IMO. I also liked the constant changes in direction in it's routing whereas PN has a few stretches where the holes play in the same direction.

[Kyle Harris]

Pine Needles is the best Donald Ross routing I've played.

I'll now hang up and listen.

[Jason Thurman]

The portion in question: But then it was said Mid Pines was more demanding and a private championship course with forced carries, elevated greens and no ground game.  On the other hand, it was said Pine Needles was on a broader scale with much more elevation and much more strategy.  Is that accurate?

I've only played each course once. Pine Needles back around 2012, Mid Pines probably around 2015.

My immediate reaction to the question was "No." But as I think about it, and pull up a few pics of the course to cheat, I can kind of see what he's saying. Mid Pines does seem to have more holes where a ground-approach is impractical or dissuaded. More fronting bunkers, probably more false fronts, and more uphill approach shots. I don't recall much in the way of true "forced carries" at either course, but it does seem like someone playing the ground game might have more success at Pine Needles.

Part of that may stem from Mid Pines being more low-lying in spots. It was soggy in a spot or two when I played it. And Pine Needles is broader-shouldered and probably does have more elevation change, although neither course is flat. But Mid Pines has some pretty flat holes while I remember elevation change being a near constant at Needles.

More strategic? I don't know about that.

It's interesting - I remember when I first started reading about these two courses that the near consensus was that Pine Needles was the "championship test" and Mid Pines was a lovely sporty course. It's interesting to hear someone reach the opposite conclusion. In reality, I don't know that one is really much harder than the other. I do think it's interesting, though, that EVERYONE seems to agree that they're very different courses, despite being across the street and designed by the same dude and owned by the same company. That people can have such radically different interpretations of what those courses even ARE at a basic level is pretty interesting - I mean, Tobacco Road isn't like anything I've ever seen, and some people hate it and some people love it, and it seems totally outside the box... but we all would AGREE on those things, right? It probably says something for Donald Ross that his courses can be interpreted so fundamentally differently by different people.

Also: I'm 100% here for Kyle's hot take above. I love the journey the routing at Pine Needles takes you on.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I've only played Pine Needles once, 5 years ago. Played 3 rounds at Mid Pines including 36 holes a couple of weeks ago. My memory of Pine Needles compared to Mid Pines was that it was broader in scale, but tightened up in the last 4 or 5 holes.

It doesn't tighten up much. Even 17 plays wider than many of the holes at MP, and 18 feels plenty wide. 16 is a par three, and 15 isn't "tight."

But I agree that PN is "wider" for sure. Significantly so. Both have similar elevation changes, I feel.

I found Mid Pines to be strategic in that it helps if you can move the ball both ways off the tee and there are times when one side of the fairway gives a better angle into the green.

If you're trying to roll the ball on, or bounce it on, I definitely agree with both of these parts. MP is narrower and has more doglegs that require the ball to curve a bit in an ideal world, and more fronting hazards require the better angles if you want to bounce/roll the ball on.

Some other differences, IMO:

• PN has more severe fall-offs but larger greens. They play about the same size, effectively, though given the larger fall-offs.
• PN greens were a bit more severe internally. But if so, barely. And maybe I just had tougher putts at PN.
• MP, like above, has more fronting hazards and more doglegs that feel like curving the ball off the tee would be helpful.

Mid Pines did have quite a few low spots where drainage could be an issue and we played the day after a soaker the night before. When Southern Pines is added to the portfolio, it will be an even greater set of courses under one umbrella.

Agree with that. The fairways are a bit rough right now. They've sprayed them recently to kill off the rye or something? Lots more plugged balls (drivers would plug and stop rather than getting a little roll) at MP than at PN. I'm chalking that up as seasonal or a difference in scheduling for now.

Part of that may stem from Mid Pines being more low-lying in spots. It was soggy in a spot or two when I played it. And Pine Needles is broader-shouldered and probably does have more elevation change, although neither course is flat. But Mid Pines has some pretty flat holes while I remember elevation change being a near constant at Needles.

I feel that might be accurate - a bit more elevation at PN. Maybe.

It's interesting - I remember when I first started reading about these two courses that the near consensus was that Pine Needles was the "championship test" and Mid Pines was a lovely sporty course.

Perhaps because PN can be stretched out longer? The tips at MP are, what, 6700?

Also: I'm 100% here for Kyle's hot take above. I love the journey the routing at Pine Needles takes you on.

I do as well, though I have the feeling I don't really know what I'm talking about when I talk about routings, so I'll leave that more so to the experts.

[Sean_A]

1. I think MP has a bit more severe greens because of smallish size and angles of approach. 

2. Despite MP having the rep as a great walk, the PN journey feels more expansive.  It seems like more trees should have been removed from MP.

3. I prefer PN's bunker/waste scheme as it is less predictable.  MP tends to rely too much on right and left sand, PN is somewhat guilty of this as well.  I wish waste areas ran through/across fairways a few times on both courses.

4. PN is a more consistent design throughout. Each course has a stinker hole, but the water at MP 3 really does drag down a very good start to the course.  PN's stinker is 10, but water isn't the only issue.  I don't have a lot of time for MP stretch 13-16.  They aren't bad holes, but they all seem like filler.  I dislike PN 17, but it isn't filler as there is an element of controversy to the hole. 

5. I prefer the shaping of PN.   

6. MP has room to move the ball either direction despite the visual message from the tee.

7. I prefer the PN bar 

Overall, I prefer Pine Needles, but I think Mid Pines may be the better course partly because it plays tougher than many think it should.  I also think MP has a higher ceiling if more work was done to the course.  I give both 1*.  Future visits could alter my opinions.

Ciao

[Ira Fishman]

I have played both courses 8-10 times and go back and forth on which I prefer. It is a tribute to Ross that two courses across the road from each other can be so different and so good.


I agree with much of what Sean says and would add:


**MP has the best hole (Number 12), the most clever (Number 4 although PN 9 very good), and the stronger finishing hole even though I quite like the green complex at PN 18.


**The holes at PN have more variety.


**The interior green contours at PN more interesting and complex, but the green side bunkering at MP leave more challenging shots. The pitching and chipping at PN more fun because of the fall offs around the greens.


Unlike Sean, I like PN 10 and MP 16. PN 15-17 is a weaker stretch than any stretch at MP.


Finally, although the food is better at the bar at PN, the MP bar is far superior because of the patio and view.


Ira

[Sean_A]

PN and MP are difficult to compare because they are more similar than not as defined by the terrain, soil, grass and general showcasing of Sand Hills qualities. Neither course really has those truly top notch holes we see at more famous courses. They both provide straight forward high quality golf without much in the way of design frills. This is really the Ross MO for the most part with obvious exceptions. I wouldn't worry much about which course to play if only one is on the cards unless I hadn't seen one in a long time. Both courses hit the spot in the way an excellent pub meal might.

Ciao

[David_Madison]

Hey Sean -


I'm a member at PN/MP and have played each many times over the past five years. There really are some big differences between the two. You've identified some and here's my take...


MP's greens definitely have more interior movement, especially if their speed is similar to PN's. Putts break far more than they read, whereas at PN they seem to break less than it looks. I can't think of a course I've played with more severely breaking putts, especially at just moderate speeds. You can pretty much hide the cup in the middle of each green and make them extremely difficult to access unless you are coming up at them from a very narrow range of angles. Kyle Franz was given lots more freedom to shape and contour the greens at MP whereas at PN all he could do was add a limited amount of material to the existing surfaces, and it definitely shows up in the complexity of each green from a putting and chipping perspective.


You mentioned that you didn't think think much of MP 13-16. I, and many of us who play these courses regularly, believe that the final five at MP is one the most interesting and attractive finishing stretches of holes in the area. Fairway placement is crucial depending upon cupping locations. Further, each of these holes typically favors a shot that's shaped in one direction and then an approach that's shaped the other way.


MP is a fantastic hickory and ground game course. Even though at first glance PN seems more amenable to that style of play, MP is probably more intricate and interesting in this respect. There's a reason why a major national hickory event is held at Mid-Pines every year. While many of the greens are elevated a bit, they can pretty much all be accessed by working shots off the bumps and hollows 10-30 yards short of each green. #9 is a perfect example, one that Jay Mickle has pretty well mastered. Even thought it's a short par-4 and you can almost always wedge it in, often the better shot is something that's bumped in along the ground from just right of the left hand green side bunker.


I prefer MP's routing as it's an interior course whereas PN is routed through a residential community. It's far more intimate a routing, an easier, quicker walk for sure with tees typically right on top of the preceding green. A feature that we all love is that MP can be played in any number of loops. My wife and I love playing 1,6,7, and then 12-18 late in the afternoon. 1-4 is a nice loop that brings you back to the clubhouse, and there are a bunch of other opportunities to bounce around. And the view from around the 6th green is incredible, as from that one area you can catch a look at more than half the holes on the course and really see how the course flows in all directions.


Last thing -- played at a similar yardage, MP is definitely the more difficult of the two courses. During our club championship or pretty much any other event where the two courses are used, the scores at MP are pretty uniformly 2-4 shots higher.


I can say lots of positives about PN as well and really enjoy playing it. But if I have to split 10 rounds, it's definitely going to be 8/2 or 7/3 in favor of MP.

[Tim Martin]

Hey Sean -


I'm a member at PN/MP and have played each many times over the past five years. There really are some big differences between the two. You've identified some and here's my take...


MP's greens definitely have more interior movement, especially if their speed is similar to PN's. Putts break far more than they read, whereas at PN they seem to break less than it looks. I can't think of a course I've played with more severely breaking putts, especially at just moderate speeds. You can pretty much hide the cup in the middle of each green and make them extremely difficult to access unless you are coming up at them from a very narrow range of angles. Kyle Franz was given lots more freedom to shape and contour the greens at MP whereas at PN all he could do was add a limited amount of material to the existing surfaces, and it definitely shows up in the complexity of each green from a putting and chipping perspective.


You mentioned that you didn't think think much of MP 13-16. I, and many of us who play these courses regularly, believe that the final five at MP is one the most interesting and attractive finishing stretches of holes in the area. Fairway placement is crucial depending upon cupping locations. Further, each of these holes typically favors a shot that's shaped in one direction and then an approach that's shaped the other way.


MP is a fantastic hickory and ground game course. Even though at first glance PN seems more amenable to that style of play, MP is probably more intricate and interesting in this respect. There's a reason why a major national hickory event is held at Mid-Pines every year. While many of the greens are elevated a bit, they can pretty much all be accessed by working shots off the bumps and hollows 10-30 yards short of each green. #9 is a perfect example, one that Jay Mickle has pretty well mastered. Even thought it's a short par-4 and you can almost always wedge it in, often the better shot is something that's bumped in along the ground from just right of the left hand green side bunker.


I prefer MP's routing as it's an interior course whereas PN is routed through a residential community. It's far more intimate a routing, an easier, quicker walk for sure with tees typically right on top of the preceding green. A feature that we all love is that MP can be played in any number of loops. My wife and I love playing 1,6,7, and then 12-18 late in the afternoon. 1-4 is a nice loop that brings you back to the clubhouse, and there are a bunch of other opportunities to bounce around. And the view from around the 6th green is incredible, as from that one area you can catch a look at more than half the holes on the course and really see how the course flows in all directions.


Last thing -- played at a similar yardage, MP is definitely the more difficult of the two courses. During our club championship or pretty much any other event where the two courses are used, the scores at MP are pretty uniformly 2-4 shots higher.


I can say lots of positives about PN as well and really enjoy playing it. But if I have to split 10 rounds, it's definitely going to be 8/2 or 7/3 in favor of MP.

David-If you add in Southern Pines how does that affect your 10 round split? Thanks.

[Jay Mickle]

OK, I am as Ran puts it a bit of a Homey and PN and MP are the home courses. In the past 11 years I have played over 2000 rounds with hundreds of players of all levels. What I get from this thread is how just how much you have to play a great course to truly expose its full character. I read the reviews and understand each of the viewpoints based on limited play. Both courses have their highs and mids (no real lows).

I am told that when the Bell family purchased Pine Needles it was in pretty rough shape and Bullet Bell, Peggy Kirk Bell's husband imparted his mark by driving the tractor with blade around the greens to level them. On the other side of Midland Road Mid Pines, at the time not owned by the Bells suffered a bit benign neglect of the greens. When the Bell's became majority owners, Mid Pines remained the poor stepchild to Pine Needles which flourished as a 3x US Women's Open Venue.

I started playing all of my rounds at PN with the occasional round at MP when tee times were not available at the "main" course. As time went on my ratio changed to 60/ 40 for MP and I was discovering Golf Course Architecture through play and then an introduction to GolfClubAtlas. When word of a redo of the course by a no name architect, Kyle Franz, was confirmed at a Founding Member dinner I was a bit concerned. (Funny aside: At that dinner Kyle was asked to talk about his vision for the renovation. Only a couple of minutes into his talk Peggy Kirk Bell, then about 90 yrs. old stopped Kyle and asked in her gravelly voice  "how old are you?"  Kyle said 32 and proceeded to present his CV for her). During the renovation Kyle and I became friends and my concerns were put to rest and he made a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.


While much has been made of the return of Mid Pines to a more Sandhills character. I believe that Kyles greatest accomplishment was not changing the neglected interior contouring of the greens. He expanded them back out to where they had been and when possible incorporated some perimeter pin positions in the character of the rest of the green.  Upon restoration the greens remained as complex as when he started with the addition of fall offs that had disappeared over time. Pine Needles has seen a number redos in the past 20 years and the most recent by Kyle Franz created a fresh look and added interest to some otherwise flatish greens. 
 
 When the mini tour events were played at both courses Mid Pines played about 3 strokes harder and 400+ yards shorter. The reason was that the short game is dominant at Mid Pines. At PN almost all pin positions are accessible from anywhere in the fairway. At MP the contouring and the angling of the greens to the fairways asks that your approach shot come from the appropriate part of the fairway.** With the original Ross internal contouring the MP greens are as hard to putt as they are to read. Like Augusta we say that you don't read the greens you remember them.
 
 Personal taste may favor the big broad-shouldered course or the tighter more intimate course.  From my perspective I understand equating the 2 courses through 11 holes, but from 12 through 18 it is not contest in Mid Pines favor with the final 3 being the best closing holes in the Sandhills.
 I play MP 7 to 3 over PN. After a big rain I gravitate to PN as it seems to drain faster. If Southern Pines joins the family my play ratios will surely change as SP has the best terrain for golf in the area. That all 3 of the courses can be played day after day is a testament to the level of fun and challenge, they provide.



**Playing with young guns who hit only driver/8 iron into the par 5s dropping the ball from the stratosphere onto the green, I understand that this comment does not have universal application.

[David_Madison]

Tim - I honestly can't answer yet. I haven't played SP enough to really know it, and once Kyle has worked his magic on it then I'll be in a better position to respond.


Jay - Excellent summary! You and I came to the same bottom lines while taking different routes to get there, sorta' like our respective golf games I guess!