[Tom_Ross]

I've noticed that this group seems to like to argue about semantics and definitions, so let me offer my definition of "fluke" for the sake of this posting:

fluke - an unexpected event, of singular nature of occurance, that surprises or offers a new look at an existing known entity.

Many people believe "fluke" to mean a bad thing.  That is not the point of view I'm making.  In fact, if you use purely the dictionary definition, "fluke" is considered to be a stroke of good luck.

Crump had no previous background in course design.  He has considered to be a good amateur golfer, but wasn't considered to be someone of outstanding skill-level (ie. D.Ross, C.B.MacDonald, Jack Neville, etc.).  He died before the course was completed, so he wasn't able to make the on-going subtle changes that Ross did at Pinehurst, Fownes at Oakmont or MacDonald at NGLA. And he went into the design with some amount of pre-disposition about the types of holes that he wanted to have (quoted in Walker Cup program from 1985)...

a) One long hole on each side, that required three full shots
b) 4 pars threes, to be spread out evenly and requiring 4 different shot lengths
c) a drive and pitch and drive and pitch-&-run on both sides

I've never been able to find any evidence that Crump had further aspirations to build other courses, so I pose this question...

Is it possible that Crump had an inherent gift to understand, find and shape greatness, albeit only one time, or were his efforts at Pine Valley simple a fluke of good fortune to find the land that, when cleared properly, was simply built to host a course just like the land at TOC?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tom,

Crump did have some professional assistance designing PV.  Several of the prominent architects of the day assisted - Flynn, Maxwell, Tillie, Colt.  But Crump still did a lot amount of the design himself, no small feat.

The same could be said of another "one-hit wonder," Fownes at Oakmont.

[Michael Dugger]

for starters.....
Other one hit wonders also include Pebble Beach and Merion.  I have always sort of  felt that amateur architects are a good thing because they explore new ideas.

secondly......
You will be hard pressed to convince anyone that Pine Valley was built on land suitable for a golf course, surely not in the manner that TOC is suitable.  The # of trees felled there is astronomical.  Ten years is a long time.

thirdly......
I don't see the relevance of Crump passing, and furthermore he did have aspirations of building another course for women.

lastly......
To some degree, I think the archetype of greatness always has to have an element of luck, or fluke to it.  It is what makes it that way.  However don't think a TON of time and effort and thought didn't go into making Pine Valley what it is.  Fluke implies the wrong connotation, IMHO.  

Let me ask you, is Sand Hills a fluke?  
Is Pacific Dunes?
Is Shadow Creek?

[Tim_Weiman]

Tom Ross:

My feelings are similiar to Tom Paul. I certainly don't want to debate the meaning of "fluke" or any other word. But, I do accept your suggestion that "fluke" might have a positive meaning. That's because I've always considered repeatedly coming up with new, original work, the most difficult thing for any artist (golf architect, musician, artist, etc).

FYI, I've been looking at or thinking about golf courses for more than forty years and I've only come up with two ideas of something not yet done...... and I'm not telling!

Clearly, Crump's Pine Valley was a breakout, a new and original design that has stood the test of time.

[Tom_Ross]

Then let me ask another question.  Is Pine Valley the most misunderstood course in the world?  I ask this because it seems that of all of it's characteristics, the thing that people take away the most (writers, architects, etc.) is the appearance and the sandy waste areas.  To me, and this is nicely articulated in the Course Review section, the green complexes and course routing are its two greatest aspects.  And these are rarely copied.  In comparison, TOC is considered to be a course that is difficult to understand and appreciate, but yet the holes and characteristics are copied all over the world.    

[A.G._Crockett]

Last Monday morning, I watched the Nelson-Littler Shell WWOG match from Pine Valley from the early 60's.  Other than still photos, it was the first time I had ever seen the course, and quite likely the only time I WILL see the course!

In addition to the obvious difficulty and beauty of the course, I kept thinking "This looks just like something Mike Strantz would do!"  Is that heresy?  I hope not.

To avoid hijacking the thread, I'll say no to the question of the "fluke."  The land allowed the course to be uncovered, and someone sensitive to that (along with help) did so.  The fact that they did no other courses is not relevant, though it might be curious.

[Tim_Weiman]

Tom Ross:

As early as 1966, Dan Jenkins expressed that there were two things misunderstood about Pine Valley:

a) fairway width - quite generous
b) beauty

Jenkins described the "fairness" of Pine Valley his biggest surprise in putting together his 18 Best Golf Holes in America and he described Pine Valley as providing the greatest pleasure to the eye of any course he had seen.

Regarding the greens, for a certain class of player - let's say mid handicap - just getting there is likely to be the focus. That's because despite the generous fairway width, Pine Valley has pyschology going for it: it intimidates the man who lacks confidence.

But, surely, for better players the greens are what the course is all about, at least that is how Bob Lewis, the competitive course record holder, once described the course to me.

Honestly, I've never thought too much about the routing of Pine Valley. There is so much to appreciate about so many of the holes, that I've never gotten that far. But, I do recall Tom Paul has written about the subject and the fact that there are so many great holes surely suggests Crump et al got something right with the routing!

[Brian_Gracely]

Tom,

Two of the things I've always felt were underappreciated about Pine Valley was the use of angles off the tee and cross-hazzards.  This goes back to the dual penal and strategic nature of the course, but it also allows the course to protect itself against the constant pressure to increase the length of the course.  Granted they are adding some length to holes like #7 so you are encouraged to hit driver instead of fairway wood to Hell's Half Acre, but the existing design does not allow the course to be overpowered like many others.  It would be good to see more course emulate these characteristics in the future.  

[cary lichtenstein]

Definetly a fluke if fluke is defined as genius

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()