[A.G._Crockett]

A couple of clarifications. The connector hole between the fourth green and the 15th tee is not a recovered lost hole but rather an entirely new hole. There was previously a hole in the general area but laid out in a different direction to provide for a 9 hole loop (1-4, connector, 15-18).
As for Mid Pines being the easiest, it has always played harder than Pine Needles. Mini tour scores at MP were 3 shots higher than PN despite being 400 yards shorter. The explanation would be that MidPines was designed as a tournament course and Pine Needles was designed as a resort course. Of course your results may differ.

Thanks for the info Jay. The MP/PN score data is surprising to me.

Two notes on this:
1. I was told by the CGA that the three courses in the Carolinas that have PCC adjustments the most are Pine Needles, Mid Pines, and Tobacco Road.  Tobacco Road I think we can all understand, MP and PN playing to that level of difficulty for scoring is pure Donald Ross, because it just doesn't "feel" like that when you are playing.

2. Several weeks ago, I played a two-day tournament at Mid Pines and Pine Needles, one day on each course.  (Philip Hensley also played, though among a MUCH younger and better group of golfers!)  There was a +3 PCC adjustment to the scores each day; I've not seen anything like that since the PCC became part of the handicap procedure.  Even +1 is very rare, and I'm not sure if I've had a +2, much less a +3.
One other personal observation about the three courses.  My personal ranking, I think would be SP/MP/PN; I am a BIG fan of the work at Southern Pines: I am NOT a fan of what has been done at Pine Needles to get ready for the Open this year.  The planting of pampas grass all over the place, down the side of fairways to greatly narrow landing areas, at both ends of fairway bunkers, and so on, introduces an element of randomness that is just off-putting, at least to me.  I don't know how much of this has been dictated by the USGA, and of course don't know if all of it will stay after the Open, but it just seems...wrong.

[Peter Sayegh]

Very interesting A.G. Thanks. I had not heard about the changes at PN. It's very rare that I play there.

"MP and PN playing to that level of difficulty for scoring is pure Donald Ross, because it just doesn't "feel" like that when you are playing." My sentiments exactly re: MP-I just couldn't articulate it as well as you did.

[jim_lewis]

I have played the "new" Southern Pines Golf Club several times and have the following observations.


It is, in fact, a challenging and difficult course for the reasons mentioned above by others. A strong player may be misled by the fact that it is relatively short playing a little over 6300yards from the back tee. I think it plays longer because of the elevation changes and the elevated greens on many holes.


It may be challenging for a strong player, but it is downright hard for a middle or high handicapper. Aside from the many false fronts and severe greens, there are the difficult greenside bunkers. Many bunkers are located well below the green leaving a long uphill sand shot that nobody plays well, especially average and below golfers. In addition the sand is soft and not well maintained.


I love the course, but it is no picnic. Be sure and bring your rangefinder, because there are next to no yardage markers.

[Brett Meyer]

I am NOT a fan of what has been done at Pine Needles to get ready for the Open this year.  The planting of pampas grass all over the place, down the side of fairways to greatly narrow landing areas, at both ends of fairway bunkers, and so on, introduces an element of randomness that is just off-putting, at least to me.  I don't know how much of this has been dictated by the USGA, and of course don't know if all of it will stay after the Open, but it just seems...wrong.

I can understand this view but I actually liked the addition of clumps of wiregrass because without them, it's pretty easy to play out of those sandy waste areas. I remember back when they restored no.2 c.2011 that they talked about how the sandy waste areas should be a crapshoot--you could get a very good lie in the bare sand or almost have to take an unplayable if you get under one of those clumps in the wrong way.

I think that the amount of wiregrass in the sandy waste areas at PN right now creates just the right amount of balance. You usually get a good lie, but will occasionally have a borderline unplayable one. They're definitely creating a few of the latter right now, but my understanding is that this is always how it was supposed to be. You shouldn't hit it there. And this shouldn't be a problem at PN because it isn't too narrow...unless you get too aggressive with your drives.

[Steve Kline]

Two notes on this:
1. I was told by the CGA that the three courses in the Carolinas that have PCC adjustments the most are Pine Needles, Mid Pines, and Tobacco Road.  Tobacco Road I think we can all understand, MP and PN playing to that level of difficulty for scoring is pure Donald Ross, because it just doesn't "feel" like that when you are playing.




I played TR, MP, and PN just last week. I never see PCC adjustments when I post a score. However, there was one for each of these courses. So, it was really interesting to me that I ran across your comment.

[Scott Warren]

How does the PCC calculation work in the US where a day’s rounds are generally played by a non-organised field?


Here in Australia, scores for handicapping typically have to be submitted as part of an organised competition, so the entire field gets finalised as one and entered into the handicapping software at the same time. As I understand the PCC calculation, that makes sense in terms of determining any necessary adjustment to the scratch rating via the PCC.


Is there a deadline by which scores have to be entered in the US and the PCC isn’t calculated until then?

[A.G._Crockett]

How does the PCC calculation work in the US where a day’s rounds are generally played by a non-organised field?


Here in Australia, scores for handicapping typically have to be submitted as part of an organised competition, so the entire field gets finalised as one and entered into the handicapping software at the same time. As I understand the PCC calculation, that makes sense in terms of determining any necessary adjustment to the scratch rating via the PCC.


Is there a deadline by which scores have to be entered in the US and the PCC isn’t calculated until then?

Scott,


I trust that someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding that the PCC adjustment is an algorithm that adjusts the differentials if either the course or weather conditions “significantly impact players’ performance”.  There isn’t any connection between the PCC adjustments and whether or not it’s a competition vs casual play, except that it is certainly easier to get good data from a field of players who all have indexes.


Three examples from my own recent rounds: A round at my club on a day when the course was absolutely soaked was adjusted; this was “non-organized” play.  A tournament round in 30 mph winds was adjusted by 2 shots. And our practice rounds at Pine Needles and Mid Pines were adjusted by 1 shot, while the actual tournament rounds were adjusted by 3 shots.  The weather was fine all three days, but the courses are HARD, and golfers just shoot high scores on those two tracks.


As to the other question, I don’t think it matters when a player enters the score; if the algorithm has kicked in and made an adjustment for that course on that day, the player’s differential would adjust automatically.

[Scott Warren]

My question is not competition vs casual, that’s just the mechanism by which in one situation the day’s cards are all entered as one vs cards being entered gradually over whatever period of time.


Given it’s the actual scores of the day themselves that determine any PCC adjustment, I was curious about how it’s managed where say four or five groups worth of players don’t enter their score for a week, you could encounter a situation where there goes from a PCC of zero to one of 2 based on those scores being added to the calculation.


I would assume there must be a cutoff by which you have to have entered your score for it to count and there’s no PCC determined or handicap adjustment made until that time?

[A.G._Crockett]

My question is not competition vs casual, that’s just the mechanism by which in one situation the day’s cards are all entered as one vs cards being entered gradually over whatever period of time.


Given it’s the actual scores of the day themselves that determine any PCC adjustment, I was curious about how it’s managed where say four or five groups worth of players don’t enter their score for a week, you could encounter a situation where there goes from a PCC of zero to one of 2 based on those scores being added to the calculation.


I would assume there must be a cutoff by which you have to have entered your score for it to count and there’s no PCC determined or handicap adjustment made until that time?

I don’t know the answer to this. But I have seen a PCC adjustment show up several days after I posted my score from a non-organized round. I can’t think of any reason the algorithm and adjustment would have a deadline, but maybe somebody else knows the definitive answer to this.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I don’t know the answer to this. But I have seen a PCC adjustment show up several days after I posted my score from a non-organized round. I can’t think of any reason the algorithm and adjustment would have a deadline, but maybe somebody else knows the definitive answer to this.

Only scores posted that day (by midnight) are used to determine the PCC.

That is why it is important that players submit their scores the day they play:
https://www.whs.com/articles/2019/playing-conditions-calculation.html

See also 4.3 here:
https://www.usga.org/handicapping/roh/2020-rules-of-handicapping.html

A player should submit their score as soon as possible on the day of play, after completion of their round, and before midnight (local time).
If a player does not submit their score on the day of play:Their Handicap Index will not be updated in time for the next day (see Rule 5.4 Frequency of Revision of a Handicap Index Update), and[/q]

• Their score will not be included in the daily playing conditions calculation (PCC) (see Rule 5.6 Playing Conditions Calculation).
• When a score is posted to the player’s scoring record after the day of play and the PCC for the day the round was played has already been performed, the PCC adjustment should still be applied to the player’s Score Differential calculation even though the player's score was not included in the PCC.

• If a score is submitted out of sequence:The score should be added to the player’s scoring record in the correct chronological order.
• The published PCC adjustment for the golf course played, on the day the round was played, should be applied to the Score Differential calculation.
• The player’s Handicap Index should be recalculated.
• Note: The Handicap Committee should investigate any repeated occurrence of a player failing to submit a score in a timely manner (see Rule 7.1 Handicap Committee).
  If there is no evidence that the player has acted for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage, all scores submitted in the intervening period should stand for handicap purposes.

[A.G._Crockett]

I don’t know the answer to this. But I have seen a PCC adjustment show up several days after I posted my score from a non-organized round. I can’t think of any reason the algorithm and adjustment would have a deadline, but maybe somebody else knows the definitive answer to this.

Only scores posted that day (by midnight) are used to determine the PCC.

That is why it is important that players submit their scores the day they play:
https://www.whs.com/articles/2019/playing-conditions-calculation.html

See also 4.3 here:
https://www.usga.org/handicapping/roh/2020-rules-of-handicapping.html

A player should submit their score as soon as possible on the day of play, after completion of their round, and before midnight (local time).
If a player does not submit their score on the day of play:Their Handicap Index will not be updated in time for the next day (see Rule 5.4 Frequency of Revision of a Handicap Index Update), and[/q]

• Their score will not be included in the daily playing conditions calculation (PCC) (see Rule 5.6 Playing Conditions Calculation).
• When a score is posted to the player’s scoring record after the day of play and the PCC for the day the round was played has already been performed, the PCC adjustment should still be applied to the player’s Score Differential calculation even though the player's score was not included in the PCC.

• If a score is submitted out of sequence:The score should be added to the player’s scoring record in the correct chronological order.
• The published PCC adjustment for the golf course played, on the day the round was played, should be applied to the Score Differential calculation.
• The player’s Handicap Index should be recalculated.
• Note: The Handicap Committee should investigate any repeated occurrence of a player failing to submit a score in a timely manner (see Rule 7.1 Handicap Committee).
  If there is no evidence that the player has acted for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage, all scores submitted in the intervening period should stand for handicap purposes.

Excellent; thanks,

[Scott Warren]

Thanks Erik!

[Ira Fishman]

We just played MP, SP, and PN on three glorious fall days. It was our first time for SP. I am trying to sort it out. The elevation changes and accompanying views are far more dramatic and enchanting than I expected. The greens are even more dramatic in a good way--it would be great fun to pick hole locations. There are a number of wonderful holes--2, 4, 13, and 17 in particular. Yet, I did not find it quite compelling or coherent. The Par 3s other than 7 blended together even though each was quite attractive. 10, 15, and 16 all offered the same approach shot. 8 and 11 are visually stunning, but unless you are a long hitter who wants to take on risk, not that interesting strategically.


I definitely will go back, but the narratives at PN and MP remain more alluring.


Ira

Apologies for bumping my own post, but we just had another glorious three fall days at MP, PN, and SP (one of these days our luck with weather will run out). After some reflection (“some” is the deepest I go), I stand by my post about SP with a few amendments. On a second play, I appreciate the strategy on Number 8 and would add Number 18 to the list of good holes—it is a very awkward tee shot in a good way because of how the fairway cambers with a green complex that caps off the others appropriately. My other amendment though is that the green contours on Number 2 fooled me into thinking that it is a better hole than it is; conversely, Number 5 is a better Par 5 largely because of the angle of the green with the fall off left.


At the end of the day, MP and PN remain a coin flip for me with SP not quite at the same level of appreciation.


Ira


PS The high point of our visit was getting to join Jay Mickle on the Mickle Patio at MP for drinks.

[Tyler Kearns]

Ira,


I played the MP, PN and SP trio last month.  In regards to the 18th at Southern Pines, one of the guys in my group who can't hit a draw to save his life played a fade down the 1st fairway.  Just need to be far enough left to be able to get approach over the trees between the holes.  We only played the course once, not sure if this is a viable strategy long-term.


I've played Mid Pines 3 times now, and continue to score worse each round.  The greens are extremely challenging to read in my opinion, a lot more slope than meets the eye.  I found the greens at Southern Pines much easier to read, and granted there is probably more contour to them, but there are distinct tiers where the ball can stop.


Tyler

[mike_malone]

I played MP, PN, and SP in the last three days. MP was my favorite because of the intimate routing, the wonderful bunkering, and feeling that decisions were needed often.


  PN was quite open and less interesting for my game.


SP needs some maturing before I would give my truest opinion. I felt that it was bordering on goofy.


I had the most fun at MP and scored best at SP.


It’s hard to believe that I had never been to Pinehurst. It is indeed the Cradle of golf in America.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()