Why is Pete Dye GC not Dye' s best?

[Matt Kardash]

Tell me why?
I was looking at this wonderful video tour and thought to myself, this is the most perfect example of a Dye Design I can think of, on perhaps his most beautiful inland site.The hole's are great and varied, it has probably the best wall-to-wall shaping of his career, one of his best site's, has a lot of character and an identify of its own.I somehow feel like this course is underrated in his catalogue and in general. Am I wrong?

[Ronald Montesano]

I've played it one time, and that was a decade ago. It received a bit of exposure for a few years, as a tournament site for the now-Korn Ferry Tour. These are the points that I believe support your estimation for the course:


*Took his sweet time to build it (out of his hands) so had time to assess and reassess the possibilities;
*Opens with a strong, westward-facing hole, so no sun in eyes. The hole can play easier, if a shorter tee deck is used;
*Second hole is stunning. Heroic, picturesque, challenging, fun;
*The third is a cool, short, blind-ish par four, with plenty of chances for fun and disaster;
*The first time you play eastward, if I recall, is on the 4th hole, the daunting par-three. Play safely right or challenge left. A totally-Pete hole;
*The first long hole is the fifth, and it stacks up to the second fairway level, if I recall. Super cool hole, heroic carry over bunkers, always a bail-out available;
*Another balance hole, the sixth is not easy, but is driveable. Yucky orange water in stream reminds you where you are, as does the cart ride through the mine shaft on the next hole;
*Front nine closes with two more, interesting and strong holes.


What I love about the front, and any good course, is that you are never told how to shape your shot. A course/hole that does this, lowers itself in my estimation.

[Ronald Montesano]

Something I need to look at, is his use of mirror holes. As I rekindle my acquaintance with the second nine, it occurs to me that the 10th hole is the mirror to the second: diagonal carry option over creek, bite off what you wish, cool green site, protected green on water side. I wonder how many other hole pairings share this feature, or is it just this one? Back in a jif.


Didn't take long. 11 is nearly the reverse image of 5. This is intrigues me.

[Tommy Williamsen]

What I love about the front, and any good course, is that you are never told how to shape your shot. A course/hole that does this, lowers itself in my estimation.

Why is that? I think that a few times a round the course should suggest that shaped shot is preferable.

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:


I agree that the course is very underrated.


Why?  Some combination of:


1.  Private
2.  Remote
2a. West Virginia
3.  Never received a big splash on opening, because it took so long to happen
4.  Not a tournament site, like a lot of his more recent big name designs
5.  Had some financial difficulties back in the day, always hard to shake that reputation

[Tim_Weiman]

What I love about the front, and any good course, is that you are never told how to shape your shot. A course/hole that does this, lowers itself in my estimation.

Why is that? I think that a few times a round the course should suggest that shaped shot is preferable.

Tommy,


I agree with you that a few times a round it is challenging and therefore enjoyable to be asked to pull off a certain shaped shot. Wouldn’t mind a couple times each 9 holes. Even better is alternate demands between draws and fades.


If every hole demanded a specific shape shot, that would get old quickly. But playing golf includes being able to control and shape shots to gain advantage occasionally during the round, IMO.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Just played PD a few weeks ago for the 5th or 6th time since it opened.  Played with the the Director of Golf.  Always an enjoyable experience although the staff admits the course is in less than good shape.  They are hoping for perfect conditions next spring.  JC

[Jason Thurman]

The place is extraordinary.


Not buying that it doesn't ask you to shape shots. It doesn't DEMAND certain shots, but it certainly asks, politely and while allowing you an out, to shape shots. And for that reason, and bolstered by its mountain seeing, it's an extremely fun course to play well.


I absolutely loved it. Probably in my personal top 10. I'd have Teeth of the Dog above it. I have it over Whistling Straits, any 18 at BWR that a person could play, or Crooked Stick. I haven't played Honors, Sawgrass, The Golf Club, Long Cove, Old Marsh, Harbour Town...


I mean, Pete Dye has a ridiculous top 15 courses. I think you could have any of those 15 at the top of your personal list and it wouldn't diminish my willingness to accept your golf course recommendations. Pete Dye GC, at the very least, is among those 15.


Current state: Replaying Pete Dye GC and Teeth of the Dog in my head, and stoked to play the Meadow Valleys back 9 again. Better book that tee time tomorrow morning.

[Matt Kardash]

Matt:


I agree that the course is very underrated.


Why?  Some combination of:


1.  Private
2.  Remote
2a. West Virginia
3.  Never received a big splash on opening, because it took so long to happen
4.  Not a tournament site, like a lot of his more recent big name designs
5.  Had some financial difficulties back in the day, always hard to shake that reputation

Tom, I am curious if you still stand by your original review of the course from the Original Confidential Guide? I remember you saying that what detracts from the course is that it took so long, therefore innovations were seen at other Dye courses throughout the 80s and thus the course didn't feel fresh upon opening. Or something of the sort.
I ask because why I understand what you were saying at the time, now that many years have passed, no one remembers or cares about the fact that 5 years before opening some concept was seen on another Dye Design. I feel like today the course can be seen purely on its own merits.

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:


I think you misunderstood my review (or maybe I explained it badly).  What I meant was that the course didn't make as big a splash as it should have, because by the time it opened, people had already seen those bold forms in other places.  (It also didn't help that the back nine was 3-4 years behind the front nine!)


Didn't I give it a 7?  That's a pretty strong grade.  It doesn't make it Pete Dye's best course (I will agree with him on that 😉), but it's probably in his top 5.

[Joe Bausch]

I've only played there once, over 12 years ago when I was just starting my journey of photo-documenting golf courses.  Surprisingly, I was able to get a handful of good photos when I had no idea what I was doing!


http://www80.homepage.villanova.edu/joseph.bausch/images/albums/PeteDyeGolfClub/index.html

[Ronald Montesano]

Two gents,


We could go around to the beginning with the question Why do you feel the need to be told what to do? but we won't, at least not by my hand.


Where on The Old Course are we told This is the way you MUST hit this shot? Where are we told such a preposterous thing, on other great courses? If it is deserving of its own thread, that's another story.


The time I played the 4th at PDGC, I despised it. Back then, I didn't value the lay-up right, the pitch and the putt. Thought you had to go for it all in one, healthy chomp.


I'll tear into the back nine eventually. That side provides a hole (the 15th) where I don't know if Dye provided any shot to hit. I would love to play that hole again and again, because I would love to figure it out.


signing off for now

[Peter Bowman]

I've played it one time, and that was a decade ago. It received a bit of exposure for a few years, as a tournament site for the now-Korn Ferry Tour. These are the points that I believe support your estimation for the course:

*Took his sweet time to build it (out of his hands) so had time to assess and reassess the possibilities;
*Opens with a strong, westward-facing hole, so no sun in eyes. The hole can play easier, if a shorter tee deck is used;
*Second hole is stunning. Heroic, picturesque, challenging, fun;
*The third is a cool, short, blind-ish par four, with plenty of chances for fun and disaster;
*The first time you play eastward, if I recall, is on the 4th hole, the daunting par-three. Play safely right or challenge left. A totally-Pete hole;
*The first long hole is the fifth, and it stacks up to the second fairway level, if I recall. Super cool hole, heroic carry over bunkers, always a bail-out available;
*Another balance hole, the sixth is not easy, but is driveable. Yucky orange water in stream reminds you where you are, as does the cart ride through the mine shaft on the next hole;
*Front nine closes with two more, interesting and strong holes.


What I love about the front, and any good course, is that you are never told how to shape your shot. A course/hole that does this, lowers itself in my estimation.

This is a great description and it vividly describes my recollection of the course both times I played it in 2007 and 2010. That 5th hole was quite something!  Also don’t forget to add-in the presence of copperheads around that yucky orange water and mine shaft. 

I’ll have to get back to that course next time I visit my in-laws in WV.  Such fun!

[Matt Kardash]

Matt:


I think you misunderstood my review (or maybe I explained it badly).  What I meant was that the course didn't make as big a splash as it should have, because by the time it opened, people had already seen those bold forms in other places.  (It also didn't help that the back nine was 3-4 years behind the front nine!)


Didn't I give it a 7?  That's a pretty strong grade.  It doesn't make it Pete Dye's best course (I will agree with him on that 😉), but it's probably in his top 5.

I think I sort of got the jist of it. But what I was trying to say is that I think some 30 years later that aspect of the review becomes irrelevant. So I wanted to know if that aspect of the course still is a detractor for you? It sounded like that the course lost some points in your eyes at the time because of it.

[Tom_Doak]

I think I sort of got the jist of it. But what I was trying to say is that I think some 30 years later that aspect of the review becomes irrelevant. So I wanted to know if that aspect of the course still is a detractor for you? It sounded like that the course lost some points in your eyes at the time because of it.

No, I still don't think you're getting it.


I really like the course -- it didn't lose any points in my eyes for having its thunder stolen.  I was trying to explain why it didn't get such a big reception initially.  Unfortunately, that is still relevant to its ranking [if not to its actual quality], because once a course gets slotted in as a designer's best, or one of his top 5, or second tier, that consensus is very hard to reverse.  And lots of Mr. Dye's other courses attract way more attention and traffic.  If it hosted a Senior Tour event, maybe it would get a second chance to make a first impression . . . but the Senior Tour goes to French Lick, instead.


The one place where the course lost a half point for me was some of the silly stuff like the waterfall going through the green on #10 and the coal train.  Featuring some of the old mining equipment was a cool idea . . . staging them like they did was cheesy.  I don't know if all that stuff is still around, though, it has been ages since I was there, which is the other problem with trying to answer your question.

[Ronald Montesano]

Matt, before you and Tom continue, allow me to intermit.


You could do a separate thread, in which you do a hole vs. hole, contrasting PDGC with another one of his weller-known courses. I'd certainly pay attention to that one.


Back to the next act. over and out...rm


PS The Google Map overhead is splendid. The course, sprinkled with snow.


https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pete+Dye+Golf+Club/@39.3336956,-80.3017835,296m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x884a68cacd12c3f7:0x5e3339b14ff535d8!8m2!3d39.3293181!4d-80.3010271

[Matt Kardash]

Tom, I get what you are saying.I agree the waterfall is a little silly.

[Ronald Montesano]

I'm having a notion: would the back nine play better if it were reversed? I get that they wanted to finish beneath the clubhouse, along the entry road, sort of. What if the 10th had played back up the 18th fairway, to a green tucked hard against Simpson's Creek? The 11th might have crossed the creek, diagonally, a la the 2nd hole, but in reverse (creek on right, not on left) and then gone on from there?


Shift the entire practice facility to the north, to eliminate the current 15th hole. After new 10 and new 11, play 12 as a 3 toward the water, then tee 13 over the water, as a cut-off-what-you-can par four.



Just spitballing. The present 10th might have provided a downhill par-five closing hole of sorts, with the green across the creek (where the 10th tees are) still beneath the clubhouse. They might have rotated the clubhouse clockwise, for viewing..


For me, the weak spot is the 12-13 connector. I don't know if it's the land, or if

[Steve Wilson]

There was a Nationwide (or whatever they call the AAA tour nowadays) there for perhaps three or four years.  Those guys tore it up.  I'm thinking -24 by D. A. Points won it one year, or perhaps it was -28.  I'm certain seeing scores that low made it seem easy to a lot of observer.

[Bruce Wellmon]

I played it August 2017 and certainly thought there were some fantastic holes.
There was one absolutely insane green near the end of the back 9.
But the main limitation I found was the horrible condition of literally every tee.

Hopefully that is in the past.

[Bruce Wellmon]

I played it August 2017 and certainly thought there were some fantastic holes.
There was one absolutely insane green near the end of the back 9.
But the main limitation I found was the horrible condition of literally every tee.

Hopefully that is in the past.

Went to Google Earth.
17 is the green I was talking about, I think.

[Paul Carey]

There was a Nationwide (or whatever they call the AAA tour nowadays) there for perhaps three or four years.  Those guys tore it up.  I'm thinking -24 by D. A. Points won it one year, or perhaps it was -28.  I'm certain seeing scores that low made it seem easy to a lot of observer.

It was wet.  When greens are wet those guys always shoot low scores.

[MCirba]

It is one of the most non-obvious golf courses I ever played.   That in and of itself earns points in my book.   


Your also almost always visually tempted to make the exact wrong play, and I don't imagine that attraction towards disaster would dissipate much on future visits.

[JJShanley]

The time I played the 4th at PDGC, I despised it. Back then, I didn't value the lay-up right, the pitch and the putt. Thought you had to go for it all in one, healthy chomp.

Joe Bausch's photos, which include the yardage book, make that hole look like a Redan Short hybrid with punchbowl tendencies.

[David Wuthrich]

Pete Dye GC is a very good course, one of his best.


However, I think The Golf Club is his best.