[Carlyle Rood]

In deference to JakaB's pontifications, I wanted to begin a brief thread with a unique angle: I'll appeal to your expertise.

A friend loaned me some photos of Pine Valley he took during the 1990s.  I've also recently acquired some old postcards of Pine Valley which I think may be from the 1950s.

For those of you familiar with Pine Valley, would the following photos be of the 8th hole?  The postcard definitely is the 8th; however, are the two photos afterwards?  (I have another photo of a hole with two greens which I'll post later.)

[JakaB]

If those bunkers are 1990's sterile...are they sent out to be dry cleaned in the 00's.   Of all of Fazio's sins..the cleanliness of those bunkers must be right at the top.

[Michael Dugger]

Indeed, all three are the 8th, although the first appears to be taken prior to the additional green being added.  

Maxwell did so correct?

jakab?  I don't get your point, surprise surprise.

[JakaB]

mdug,

Thanks for your astute observation that the first pic may be prior to the additional green being added....my point was I thought the that the powers that be went all Bob Barker on those bunkers more recently than circa 1990's....

[JakaB]

I can not think of a more perfect situation of choice for the width guru's who frequent this site and play in the same triple F league as me.  Would you guys really hit a different shot shape based on which green has a hole in it that day (or do both greens have holes and only one a flag)...and while we are at it..do they have a little peg board at the tee indicating which green is in play for the strategists or do the members switch the pin from green to green after play much like so many goat tracts do for winter play to improve conditioning...looks like a world of fun for the members as I can just hear my buddies bitching from tee one if they could not play their favorite on any given day.

[A_Clay_Man]

Is this the hole Brad Klein was talking about when he commented on the well to do, and their intelligence?

I see that old right side as having my name all over it, and me having the temerity to get up and down. Fast forward 30 years and I have to take a drop off the wrong green?

Also, why would they mimic the other green? Seems like on the old hole the shot is a draw, with a cut green. Why not mirror rather mimic?

p.s. Forgive the naivitee', I have not yet worshiped any where near New Jersy.

[ian]

When I played with the assistant, we got to the 17th hole where it was freshly sodded to a fairly smooth bank. I asked him if they were cleaning things up, and he said no, the lip was eroding up to the green surface. He said that they sod them in and they naturally erode away again. This pattern happens over and over on the severe faces.

I think you have to be careful about trusting a photo to be absolutely the way it was in an era, rather than a year. If you look at that first picture, the face has caved in, giving it a rough look.

I took these recently of the 8th, and if you look you will see there are deifferences in one year.

2002 from fairway


2003 close up. That lip overhangs more than a foot.


2003 from the fairway.

[DPL11]

Ian,

Great photos!

The 8th is a wonderful short 4 to either green. I have seen quite a few train wrecks there. The bunker right of the right green is absolute murder. Due to how narrow and the angle of the base makes for some interesting recovery attempts.

They are constantly fixing steep banks around green sites. It comes with the property.
 

JakaB,

The caddy usually checks when you come down #7 to see which green is in play that day.

Doug

[larry_munger]

How bout all those pine trees between the 2 greens, don't care much for them.

[Steve Lapper]

Why Larry?

 Been on the other side of PETA recently? Hanging out with Liz Hurley and her crew?
 
  Led by a world-class host and traveler , my last visit to PV witnessed just such a mishap (train-wreck, cluster-f...k, kaboom, etcccc...) by my playing partner....on his 7th swing we all just broke into laughter. Called them the Enchanted Forest!
 
   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Carlyle, et. al.,

Don't the photos posted limit ones evaluation and response to an extremely narrow window or time frame as evidenced only by the photos presented ?

Wouldn't a more intelligent assessment result from looking at photos taken in 1922, 1929, 1936, 1943, 1950, 1957, 1964, 1971, 1978, 1985, 1992, 1999 and 2004 ?

Perhaps the photos presented vary substantially from photos taken at another point or points in time.

Earlier photos of Pine Valley reflect rather pristine sand/bunker areas, undergrowth/brush has been one of the ongoing problems that Pine Valley has only recently begun to address.

Perhaps the quality of the first photo is distorting your views, and, I believe all photos reflect pine trees between the two greens.  It stands to reason that a photo taken years later would show the growth of the trees during the intervening years between the first and later photos.

[Carlyle Rood]

Don't the photos posted limit ones evaluation and response to an extremely narrow window or time frame as evidenced only by the photos presented ?

Wouldn't a more intelligent assessment result from looking at photos taken in 1922, 1929, 1936, 1943, 1950, 1957, 1964, 1971, 1978, 1985, 1992, 1999 and 2004 ?

I was merely seeking confirmation that the photographed hole was the same as the one featured on the postcard (#8).  The photographs were taken approximately forty years after the postcard was published, so I wasn't entirely certain.

I have a book that you may want to see: Pine Valley Golf Club - A Chronicle.  It was published in 1982 and discusses changes to the holes along with vintage photographs.  Unfortunately, it wasn't helpful in this case because it seems to have been published before the second green was constructed on #8.

[JakaB]

Patrick,

What is your opinion of this two green concept.....It bothers me from a one time visitor viewpoint or a member stance on many levels.   Was the hole as designed in its original state so nebulus in strategic merit that this partial birth aboration was the best or only option.

[Mike Hendren]

I have assumed the right green is primarily a relief green. The short length of the hole and the aerial approach required by both greens with ostensibly the same club would seem to eliminate any strategic distinction.  

I do so love small pushed up greens - that's what I cut my teeth on.  

It appears from the pics that the front of the left green has been squared over time, perhaps eliminating a nasty front right hole location.  

Regards,

Mike

[Tommy Williamsen]

Pine Valley gets so much play that it was almost mandatory to either build a second green or enlarge the existing one because of the traffic.  For a very private club it gets an enourmous amount of play.

[Tim_Weiman]

JakaB:

It is fairly well known that the 8th hole at Pine Valley was designed to include a short but very demanding pitch shot. That's the essence of it.

It has been several years since I've been back to Pine Valley, but I seem to remember parts of the fairway include just enough slope as to add uncertainty regarding the direction of your pitch.

Perhaps Tom Paul or others that have been there more recently can comment on that.

Regarding the additional green, I'm not sure I like it, but apparently the large volume a play made it a necessity.......when a proposal to eliminate all guest play failed to gain sufficient support.

Only kidding!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Oh, by the way I am horrified by the new look. I havn't been to PV for a few years.  What is the reason for the pristine white sand?

[Bill_McBride]

Bernard Darwin re Pine Valley 1922 (before the Walker Cup at NGLA):
"Personally I did rather well until I got to the eighth hole, where there is a very small green entirely surrounded by a wilderness of sand.  I think my score was an average of fours until I reached it and I never finished it. [ ]  Whenever an American friend writes to me he generally has something to say about the eighth hole at Pine Valley, and only the other day one of them sent me a photograph of it.  When I look at it my surprise is not that I did not hole out, but that anyone else has ever done so."

Shortly after this he defeated Mr. Fownes at the Walker Cup after losing the first three holes and his opponent close to the pin at the Redan #4!

[A_Clay_Man]

Pat- Once again your perplexing remarks inspired further study. Looking at the 1950's photo, as distorted as it is, there is a fundamental difference in the two looks and is therefore NOT limiting. Regardless, limiting isn't a bad thing, if it gets the discussion focused, is it?

Anywho, transporting myself back to a time (pre-second green) I can appreciate the nasty looking right side as being nearly and completly natural. The primordial brain seems like it would be less stimulated with the addition of the manicured surface added later,

One thing that doesnt ring true is about the traffic issue and justification for a second green. Do all the holes at PV have alternates? I doubt it. And the absolute truth in all of this seems fishy because of  whats not being said, not being said by a certain fast typing eloquent dog-toting closet comedian.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Carlyle Rood,

The angles are slightly different, but they are the same greens.

Jaka B,

I don't think you can take exception to the intorduction of a second green on the 8th hole, when the same concept has been embraced for over 70 years on the 9th hole at Pine Valley.

One cannot forget that the cast of characters includes Maxwell and Fazio.   A darling and a devil of this site.

I wonder; if Maxwell had done # 8 and Fazio #9 if the bone of contention wouldn't follow the architect rather then the hole and the architecture

With respect to your questions, wouldn't they apply to # 9 as well ?  Yet, hole # 9's two greens have stood the test of time rather well, and I suspect hole # 8's two greens will fare the same.

Tim Weiman,

I believe you are correct with regard to the need to create a second green on that hole.

Tommy W,

Would you be horrified to find out that that's the way the course looked 40, 50, 60 and 70 years ago

A Clayman,

What is the fundamental difference you reference ?

The right side you find natural was the result of benign neglect
Take a LOOK at page 25 in Geoff Shackelford's, "The Golden Age of Golf Design", and you won't find a single plant in the PURE WHITE sand that is to the right of the 8th green.

Then, go to page 58 and look at the 8th hole.
You won't find a single scrub, bush or tree in the pure white sand that is to the right of the 8th green.

You guys don't have a clue with respect to what you're talking about.

[ian]

Adam,

That is the smallest green I have ever played on. Its less than 3,000 sq.ft. with a great deal of contour. Approximately three pin positions exist. Both times I have been there, the green is thin compared to the rest. The other green had to happen to keep the origional (which seems to me, is smaller than earlier photos seem to indicate). The new green was needed and frankly is not as bad as people seem to indicate. The size is similar and the angle is a strategic mirror of the origional. I think Fazio did a good job.

[Brian_Gracely]

Ian,

I've never been to PVGC (which of course disqualifies me in the Mucci & MacDonald book of knowledge  ), but looking at the slope of the fairway (appears to go slightly to the right), is the approach to either green all that similar?  Normally, that type of lie would often produce a shot that flies slightly right, and the trouble right of the greens appears to be significantly different.  Or are you just talking about the distance and general size/shape of the greens?

I've always thought that the approach to #8 looked scary as the green partially appears to sit in the forest.  So your commitment to the shot had to be heightened to avoid pulling it left, but that the bailout area right was no bargain either.  This was the greatness of the routing of a hole of this length.  Now it appears the failure to the right (of the left green) is softened....but that's just an opinion from the cheapseats looking at photographs.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shivas,

How do you explain the success, from a playability and architectural viewpoint of the double greens on # 9, which have been there for 70+ years ?

[JakaB]

Pat,

I didn't know 9 had a double green.....what do you base your concept of 70 years of success...If it is so successful and Pine Valley has been cosidered one of the great courses in the country during this period of time...why is the double green not now an industry standard.

[Steve Curry]

Shivas,

There is a story behind the two greens on 9 that escapes me right now, but on 8, as was already alluded to the green was too small to sustain the traffic.  One reason for not having dual greens is cost, they are quite expensive to maintain.  This would however be a great way for eliminating downtime due to maintenance schedules.

When I was at PV we used nothing but on site sand for bunkers  and was stated we often repaired lips and banks.  The DA was the most needy in terms of washout repair and I recall one occasion when we were able to see the sod stack behind which the rail ties are hidden.

Regards,
Steve

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()