[Tom_Doak]

Well, I just finished a long-winded post, only to be timed out of the Discussion Group, and lose it when I hit send.  (sigh)  Does Pinehurst monitor Ran's server?      I will try again later, or tomorrow.

Okay, my second attempt at #4:


I walked the Tom Fazio version of the course 15 years ago, and it really bothered me.  It felt like they just thought if they changed the style of the place, by building half a million small bunkers, everybody would be amazed and that would be enough.  Style over substance.


The new version is way better than that; there's a lot more substance.  But maybe it, too, suffers from trying too hard to be stylish.


Let's get the pond holes out of the way first.  They had to be there, regrettably.  They're okay for what they are.  Moving the 4th green away from the pond to the side of the hill was a good move.  Yes, it's pretty harsh if you miss right, but not as harsh as everything short going in the water, as before.


The holes I liked best were the three other par-5's.  The 2nd, 9th and 17th all have wonderful greens and approaches, full of little contours, and very different bunker schemes that you would seldom find all on the same course.  They are designed to be interesting three-shot holes for mortals, but each of them will give fits to a long hitter who goes for them in two and hits anything less than a great shot.  I'm not sure the cross-bunker at the 9th was a good idea -- I would have to see if the ladies manage to get through it okay, since the majority of them are doomed to be in it -- but it's possible that the marching orders were not to worry about that, there are other courses more suitable for women at Pinehurst.


Likewise, for David M., I thought the bunker on the 5th was a bit harsh toward the "B" player [I am the B player].  I loved the roller-coaster nature of that hole, but 4-5-6, with so much trouble far below on the right, must beat up a lot of resort guests.


The contouring of the approaches and greens throughout the course was very good, but I wasn't so fond of all the sand-scaping surrounding the holes.  There is just a lot of diddly stuff that's not really in play, enough to distract and make you wonder why it's there.  Normally I would guess that was due to a bunch of over-eager young guys doing shaping and finish work, and just hope that it blends away over time; but here I could not help wondering if it was done to elevate the style and justify a big green fee.


The Cradle has a bunch of that kind of detail work, too, but the scale and vibe of The Cradle is in keeping with that sort of stuff.  At the edge of a "championship golf course," it seemed much less at home.  Is that what others meant by "trying too hard" ? 

[PCCraig]

Interesting critique, Tom. Thanks for sharing.


There is no doubt that the folks at Pinehurst are doing their best to reposition the resort in a way to compete with the Streamsongs, Bandons and Sand Valleys of the world. I wonder if there was input from the resort to get the most out of the "minimalist" trend and have Gil build a course that gives guests that Streamsong vibe, but in doing so allowed things to become a bit overcooked.


Or perhaps that is what they were going for in an attempt to "complement" #2? I'm guessing many play #2 because they *have* to but deep down they are underwhelmed and for the younger set they are looking for more visual eye candy?


To me, I wish that Gil & his team had set out to build their best version of a Sand Hills course, instead of building a Gil Hanse course in the Sand Hills.

[Jay Mickle]

No.4 is an immensely better course than the last iteration but not at the level that I had hoped for. Doing away with 160 pot bunkers, aircraft carrier tee boxes and the features that tied in to nothing was a great improvement. Each time I play it I find more to like but still wish that it made me think of more than just my approach shot. From 13 through 16 are the low points of the course that excites on 17. As a resort course it seems to hit the mark but in a area of outstanding courses it comes up a bit short.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I don't like the 90 degree dogleg right opening hole. I've thought about other course that start with sharp doglegs and for some reason this one just doesn't seem like a good opening hole. I also didn't like 8, 13, 14 as these are holes aren't unique.

I quite liked the opening hole. Traditional strategy - you can go long and left, but it's a longer shot in. While the shorter shot challenges the bunker on the right.

No?

[Paul Rudovsky]

I played #4 about 3-4 times in the 1970's, then once around 2015, and twice since Gil finished his work.  I certainly knew nothing about golf architecture in the 1970's.


I have wondered about several things about #2 and #4 over the last two years.  First, it seems to me that the topography of the land on which #4 sits is far superior to that of #2...which is pretty flat with the exceptions of #4, 5, 13 and 18.  So why did Ross build #2 where he did rather that the land on which #4 sits.  I so understand that the counting of #2 changed over the years which may provide part of the answer...but also think it was to bring the resort closer to the Village.


Second, #4 has never drained particularly well IMHO...and while I think it is better today that in 2015...it is not hugely better.  Which makes me wonder of Ross could have known that #4's land would not drain well.  I am guessing (and I mean that very word) that he probably could not have known that.


I agree strongly with Jay's summary...it is now good but not close to great (and also not  close to #99 in USA IMO).  Better than it was but not really special...and the list of superior courses in the area is probably going to be in the neighborhood of 9-10 (18 hole) courses as soon as the work at Southern Pines is done.  To my mind, I think Pinehurst #1 would be where the Resort should spend its $$...it has outstanding bones and with some good restoration efforts could be a first class accompaniment to #2.


I have also "heard" that the reason the drainage is still iffy, is that recent effort did not dig out much of the underlying organic material buried under the surface...which would be necessary to really fix the drainage.  I do not know if this description is true or not...and will leave that to you GCA's and other experts.


Regarding why posts here are mostly about the top 0.2-0.5%...that is true in all fields.  How much chatter do you hear about professional golfers playing on the Asian Tour or Latin American Tour or some of the smaller USA tours...and how much do you hear about baseball played in the AA's?  People are always interested in analyzing (and reading about) the very best.  Me thinks that is just human nature.

[Sean_A]

I played #4 about 3-4 times in the 1970's, then once around 2015, and twice since Gil finished his work.  I certainly knew nothing about golf architecture in the 1970's.


I have wondered about several things about #2 and #4 over the last two years.  First, it seems to me that the topography of the land on which #4 sits is far superior to that of #2...which is pretty flat with the exceptions of #4, 5, 13 and 18.  So why did Ross build #2 where he did rather that the land on which #4 sits.  I so understand that the counting of #2 changed over the years which may provide part of the answer...but also think it was to bring the resort closer to the Village.


Second, #4 has never drained particularly well IMHO...and while I think it is better today that in 2015...it is not hugely better.  Which makes me wonder of Ross could have known that #4's land would not drain well.  I am guessing (and I mean that very word) that he probably could not have known that.


I agree strongly with Jay's summary...it is now good but not close to great (and also not  close to #99 in USA IMO).  Better than it was but not really special...and the list of superior courses in the area is probably going to be in the neighborhood of 9-10 (18 hole) courses as soon as the work at Southern Pines is done.  To my mind, I think Pinehurst #1 would be where the Resort should spend its $$...it has outstanding bones and with some good restoration efforts could be a first class accompaniment to #2.


I have also "heard" that the reason the drainage is still iffy, is that recent effort did not dig out much of the underlying organic material buried under the surface...which would be necessary to really fix the drainage.  I do not know if this description is true or not...and will leave that to you GCA's and other experts.


Regarding why posts here are mostly about the top 0.2-0.5%...that is true in all fields.  How much chatter do you hear about professional golfers playing on the Asian Tour or Latin American Tour or some of the smaller USA tours...and how much do you hear about baseball played in the AA's?  People are always interested in analyzing (and reading about) the very best.  Me thinks that is just human nature.

You guys have put me off #4!

Regarding your last comments, it's a shame there is this tendency to talk about mainly the concensus best courses. I am convinced there are several layers of very good courses, highly interesting courses and even some great courses left in the weeds. I hope these are the courses showcased by some clever drone pilot/podcasters at some point in the near future. I do think there is an audience and a market for these courses.

Ciao

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Second, #4 has never drained particularly well IMHO...and while I think it is better today that in 2015...it is not hugely better.  Which makes me wonder of Ross could have known that #4's land would not drain well.  I am guessing (and I mean that very word) that he probably could not have known that.

Could the drainage be why the greens, if I'm reading others correctly, feel so "off" at #4?

[Mark Pritchett]

I don't like the 90 degree dogleg right opening hole. I've thought about other course that start with sharp doglegs and for some reason this one just doesn't seem like a good opening hole. I also didn't like 8, 13, 14 as these are holes aren't unique.

I quite liked the opening hole. Traditional strategy - you can go long and left, but it's a longer shot in. While the shorter shot challenges the bunker on the right.

No?

I think the opening hole sets a good tone for the round.  Two of my all time favorite starters are doglegs as well, Cuscowilla and Peachtree.

[Brock Lynch]

Erik,


I don't know what you mean by "off". The greens on #4 have a lot of grain and it makes them hard to read and chip/pitch to. I think they present a different challenge than those on #2.


Mark,


I agree with your opening hole assessment. It can be a birdie hole, but that green has some tough pin placements near the peak in the middle and most shots into the left side get repelled further left off the green.

[JHoulihan]

Pinehurst #4. After chatting up the rest of my group and caddies, knowing I was in for a 5 hour round and quite a walk ahead (20000 steps and 9.7 miles) we were off. I did watch some of the US Amateur matches leading up to the trip knowing it was tough for some of the best, and this tournament course did not disappoint. I started well and ended up on #3 green with a birdie putt. 4 putts later and writing down a 6 I knew more than normal focus was needed if I wanted to keep smiling. Holes 9, 13, and 16 were my favorites overall with birdie on #10 just giving me a bit more energy to start the back 9. Hole #11 the Par 3 was the only hole on the course I do NOT remember in detail. There were more hills than expected but the slow pace with groups ahead and behind made it more than manageable (knowing my caddy would be carrying my bag and another’s versus me!). It to me was a tournament course first and foremost (6428 yards) especially if playing from back tees (6961/7227 yards). You can have fun here and be just so frustrated within 40 yards of the green. I was a bit of both but knew that playing here just 4 short weeks after a USGA event in fast and firm conditions would be  a once in a lifetime event.

This was posted just after my play on September 2019. More than 1 year later my memory of the details has faded, but here is what I remember. I played the week of a BMW corporate outing and the round was longer than hoped but these were things beyond my control. My phone pedometer seems to be way off. It is not such a beast to walk as the first post makes it out to be.

HOLE 1. Par 4 dogleg right with bunker on right side. Green was fairly benign allowing good approach with a birdie chance and slightly offline approach with a tough up and down. HOLE 2. Downhill tee shot with slight curve leads up uphill approach out of reach for all but the longest players. Right side bunker and the steep hill behind it may be the most severe putt on the entire course. HOLE 3. Slight right to left dogleg. Green looks unassuming but after my first 4 putt in recent memory I was quite awake. HOLE 4. First Par 3 with the green placed on large left to right slope. Right is a big no no with 2 bunkers present so the left side slope is a bit severe. HOLE 5. What a beast. 460-481-489 #1 handicap par 4. The 21 yard difference seems so much further facing an uphill fairway without sight of the green. The green site will be blind for most but I do not remember the details so clearly after being in the left trees of the tee. HOLE 6. Second Par 3 with again trouble right. Some may like the downhill look but the right side bunkers may be even more penal that hole 4. HOLE 7. ? HOLE 8. ? HOLE 9. Past best. Par 5 with large bunker separating the fairway. It can be reached off the tee so choosing a club is critical. It then asks if you want to reach the green or play safe with both right and left greenside bunkers nearby. HOLE 10. Slightly uphill left to right par 4. Great drive led to my only birdie on the back to front sloping green. HOLE 11. Par 3 I did not remember in past write up.and still do not. HOLE 12. ? HOLE 13. Past best. Par 5 with lake visible.from the tee. Bunker on right is in play but green is reachable in two if avoided. Lay up fairway is curved around lake so taking on a direct line over water may be safe option with carry distance measured carefully. Trees and brush line the hillside over green so bailing out long is no gimme par or bogey. HOLE 14. Long par 3 with lake on left. Bunkers long and right make sure you just do not stand on tee and swing away. HOLE 15 ? HOLE 16. Past best. 274-298-312 straightaway par 4. There are some bunkers to left near home, but the main defense is the sloped green. False front may lead to 3 putts as was my fate. HOLE 17. Final par 5 along road to the left side. Downhill tee shot and uphill approach similar to hole 2 but not as severe. Final solid chance at birdie but certainly not easy hole. HOLE 18. Par 4 finisher was played poorly from the tee, so I played from another course fairway to left. Not a great way to finish my trip but a memorable day for sure.

Pinehurst is a great overall resort. I have wished to play here since I was a kid and now have done so. Now that I have will I visit again? Probably not soon with hundreds of courses to see. The Cradle is on my bucket list (it was closed for corporate outing my days at the resort) but not worth a cross country flight to do so on its own.

[PCCraig]

Pinehurst #4. After chatting up the rest of my group and caddies, knowing I was in for a 5 hour round and quite a walk ahead (20000 steps and 9.7 miles) we were off. I did watch some of the US Amateur matches leading up to the trip knowing it was tough for some of the best, and this tournament course did not disappoint. I started well and ended up on #3 green with a birdie putt. 4 putts later and writing down a 6 I knew more than normal focus was needed if I wanted to keep smiling. Holes 9, 13, and 16 were my favorites overall with birdie on #10 just giving me a bit more energy to start the back 9. Hole #11 the Par 3 was the only hole on the course I do NOT remember in detail. There were more hills than expected but the slow pace with groups ahead and behind made it more than manageable (knowing my caddy would be carrying my bag and another’s versus me!). It to me was a tournament course first and foremost (6428 yards) especially if playing from back tees (6961/7227 yards). You can have fun here and be just so frustrated within 40 yards of the green. I was a bit of both but knew that playing here just 4 short weeks after a USGA event in fast and firm conditions would be  a once in a lifetime event.

This was posted just after my play on September 2019. More than 1 year later my memory of the details has faded, but here is what I remember. I played the week of a BMW corporate outing and the round was longer than hoped but these were things beyond my control. My phone pedometer seems to be way off. It is not such a beast to walk as the first post makes it out to be.

HOLE 1. Par 4 dogleg right with bunker on right side. Green was fairly benign allowing good approach with a birdie chance and slightly offline approach with a tough up and down. HOLE 2. Downhill tee shot with slight curve leads up uphill approach out of reach for all but the longest players. Right side bunker and the steep hill behind it may be the most severe putt on the entire course. HOLE 3. Slight right to left dogleg. Green looks unassuming but after my first 4 putt in recent memory I was quite awake. HOLE 4. First Par 3 with the green placed on large left to right slope. Right is a big no no with 2 bunkers present so the left side slope is a bit severe. HOLE 5. What a beast. 460-481-489 #1 handicap par 4. The 21 yard difference seems so much further facing an uphill fairway without sight of the green. The green site will be blind for most but I do not remember the details so clearly after being in the left trees of the tee. HOLE 6. Second Par 3 with again trouble right. Some may like the downhill look but the right side bunkers may be even more penal that hole 4. HOLE 7. ? HOLE 8. ? HOLE 9. Past best. Par 5 with large bunker separating the fairway. It can be reached off the tee so choosing a club is critical. It then asks if you want to reach the green or play safe with both right and left greenside bunkers nearby. HOLE 10. Slightly uphill left to right par 4. Great drive led to my only birdie on the back to front sloping green. HOLE 11. Par 3 I did not remember in past write up.and still do not. HOLE 12. ? HOLE 13. Past best. Par 5 with lake visible.from the tee. Bunker on right is in play but green is reachable in two if avoided. Lay up fairway is curved around lake so taking on a direct line over water may be safe option with carry distance measured carefully. Trees and brush line the hillside over green so bailing out long is no gimme par or bogey. HOLE 14. Long par 3 with lake on left. Bunkers long and right make sure you just do not stand on tee and swing away. HOLE 15 ? HOLE 16. Past best. 274-298-312 straightaway par 4. There are some bunkers to left near home, but the main defense is the sloped green. False front may lead to 3 putts as was my fate. HOLE 17. Final par 5 along road to the left side. Downhill tee shot and uphill approach similar to hole 2 but not as severe. Final solid chance at birdie but certainly not easy hole. HOLE 18. Par 4 finisher was played poorly from the tee, so I played from another course fairway to left. Not a great way to finish my trip but a memorable day for sure.

Pinehurst is a great overall resort. I have wished to play here since I was a kid and now have done so. Now that I have will I visit again? Probably not soon with hundreds of courses to see. The Cradle is on my bucket list (it was closed for corporate outing my days at the resort) but not worth a cross country flight to do so on its own.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I don't know what you mean by "off". The greens on #4 have a lot of grain and it makes them hard to read and chip/pitch to. I think they present a different challenge than those on #2.

I was going off the opinions expressed before me, not creating a new one. I thought several people had commented that the greens were a bit out of place, maybe too raised, etc. and I thought maybe that was due to drainage issues?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()