[mike_malone]

  This was featured on SWWOG the other night, but....

       Aren't the waste areas mostly parallel to the line of play? PVGC's create angles that need to be carried .

     Can't exactly tell from the camera, but are the bunkers at WW at all as deep and threatening as PVGC?

     Are the contours of the greens at WW anything like the variety and treachery of PVGC?

    Do the par 3's at all compare to the collection at PVGC?

    They constantly spoke of the elevation changes as being similar to PVGC?

     Is the width between the trees anywhere near the same?

    It seemed that WW had only one dogleg-#18.Is this true?


     The HHA type hole had a tree in the middle of the fairway.


    The double green had trees between the two greens.


      Do we say that courses with sand along the sides of the holes and pine trees lining each hole are "like" PVGC?-----What a joke!

[SPDB]

Mike -
What holes at PV besides 6 and 16 have waste areas that create angles?

[Mike_Sweeney]

Mayday,

I have not played Pine Valley, but played WWPB this winter for the first time. It was by far my favorite of the Pine Valley imitations (Pine Hill, Pine Barrens). It is a great course with wild terrain, lots of options on drives and approach shots. The bunkering is all over, but not in a bad way. There were always options. At least an 8 on the Doak scale and it was in great shape when we were there in February. It has elevation that you just don't think Florida would have, deep bunkers..... Some people may not like the big greens and contours tha tFazio built, but I thought it worked.

If it had an on-site lodge, and a caddy option, I think it would be even more of a GCA like mecca.

[mike_malone]

 My memory of specific holes is never the best, but I thought at least four  holes, not counting HHA.

       Mike,

     Thanks for that input.As I said the bunker depth and elevation change were hard to tell. Maybe I'm just crabby today.

[Robert Thompson]

Having played both, I wouldn't call the Barrens a Pine Valley imitation. Rather, I'd say it is inspired by Pine Valley, and Fazio took some of the look of Pine Barrens, as opposed to the playability aspects.
I feel Pine Barrens is the best Fazio I've played -- interesting to play with options abounding.

[Paul Richards]

Mike

I agree with Robert - Pine Barrens is 'inspired' by Pine Valley.

While it is certainly not an 'equal' to Pine Valley, it is definately an excellent course and if given the chance, I would play this twice instead of playing Rolling Oaks on a day of 36 holes.

[Dave_Miller]

Having played both, I wouldn't call the Barrens a Pine Valley imitation. Rather, I'd say it is inspired by Pine Valley, and Fazio took some of the look of Pine Barrens, as opposed to the playability aspects.
I feel Pine Barrens is the best Fazio I've played -- interesting to play with options abounding.

Also having played both I concur completely with Robert.  Pine Barrens is not Pine Valley but there are similarities and according to a friend who plays there frequently and knows Fazio it was inspired by Pine Valley
Fairways and Greens,
Dave

[Jonathan Cummings]

Let's match em..

1 - PVGC up 1 with little argument
2 - PVGC up 2 with less than little arguement
3 - PVGG up 3 (PB concedes at the tee)
4 - PVGC up 4 (PB whiffs)
5 - PVGC up 5 (may be the greatest inland par 3 in the world)
.
.
.
18 PVGC up 18 (the match was over at 10 but PB insisted)

Come on folks, PB is a wonderful course - I've played it often and love every minute but it should never be compared to Pine Valley.  Inspired by - ok, but never compared.

JC

[Rob_Waldron]

Mike

If you consider that PV and WWPB have a sandy soil base, 18 tees, 18 greens and bunkers without rakes referred to as "Waste Areas" they are very much alike. Besides that NO!

[Pete Buczkowski]

Mike:

I don't think all of your queries were answered...let me give those a try.  First I think its difficult to assess the course by just watching Toms and Mickelson play...WWPB was not constructed as a major test for the pros.  There are much more strategical considerations for us mere mortals.

The double green had trees between the two greens.

The two greens on #12 couldn't be any more different.  Last I heard the relatively boring left green is abandoned.  The right green is semi-blind up the hill over a sand pit, with the wildest contours on the course.  The other green site is practically bunkerless and much more mild.  They in fact make the hole play completely differently - as I understand at PV that is not the intent.

It seemed that WW had only one dogleg-#18.Is this true?

18 is the only severly doglegged hole - probably 45 degrees.  But many of the holes move one way or the other:

2 dogs left
4 is only straight for the long hitter - others will treat it like a dogleg hole
6 similar to 4 - the landing area for the 2nd shot is well left of the line to the green
8 & 9 move about 20 degree right.
12 moves right to the right green - a tee shot can be blocked out if played too far right.
14 ranges from a slight dogleg left to a larger dogleg depending on the player's strategy
15 only players going for the green will treat it as a straight hole - for mere mortals its either a dogleg right or left
18 previously mentioned.

Is the width between the trees anywhere near the same?

Hard to answer this one because there are many holes not outlined by trees, which I don't believe is true at PV.  The PV-type holes aren't really surrounded by the pine trees.  The holes surrounded by the trees vary slightly in width, while the ones not outlined by trees vary widely in width.

Aren't the waste areas mostly parallel to the line of play? PVGC's create angles that need to be carried.

There are many waste areas that need to be carried, while other carries are optional.

4 is optional off the tee, (nearly) mandatory into the green
8 mandatory carry into the green, but bailout to the left
12 mandatory carry to the right green
14 (nearly) mandatory carry for 2nd shot
15 optional carry off tee to get better angle into the green

Some of the bunkers/waste areas are deep, but there are tame ones as well.

Now about the routing of WWPB...  

[mike_malone]

 Pete,

     Thank you. Do you think it is better for the course to stand on its own rather than to be "like" PVGC.

[Pete Buczkowski]

Mike:

That depends on your point of view.  For the participants on this website, the answer is an emphatic Yes.  PV is the ultimate to most everyone on the board, and to compare a course to PV when it doesn't measure up is a black eye.  I haven't played PV but from whatever I've read or seen in the aerials, I think these are the fundamental differences:

- routing.  returning 9s are a hinderence at WWPB and in general the property is more compact than PV.  Its hard to interpret the flow at WWPB since you are always changing directions and there are many "crossover points" where the next tee is only evident by signs since there are many tess/greens in the same area.
- greens.  Cannot speak from personal knowledge but they appear pretty different.  For one, there are no tiny greens at WWPB, and most have similar shape.
- difficulty.  WWPB is not designed to be overly difficult.  Its a very interesting course for the mid handicapper, but I know some good players who aren't nearly as impressed.  From what I hear the opposite is true at PV.

However, for the general public, I think the comparison is fine.  First off, there is some radical architecture at WWPB that wouldn't be blindly accepted by the general golfing public.  I've played with quite a few strangers who thought some of the demands were difficult and unusual.  But I think the PV comparison helps them - they know PV is generally regarded as the finest course in the world, and if this course is in a similar spirit...then they will have a different attitude about it.  

I wonder if Tobacco Road would be perceived differently if it wasn't called "The Pit on Steroids"...

[mike_malone]

 Pete,

   Thanks for your helpful comments; I guess I'll play there sometime.  Your thorough observations seem not to have been affected by playing with Mike Sweeney.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Pete - I've played PB 10 times and PV 31 times (I'm a psycho and keep all my cards).  It's simply a silly comparison, one I'll bet someone like Fazio would never make.  To say he designed PB in the spirit of PV would be much more accurate.  

When PB first opened Fazio use to take his entire crew there to play golf - they all loved the place.  But I bet not one of them would imply a comparability to the two places as this thread asks.

JC  

[Pete Buczkowski]

Jonathan,

You may very well be right...my response was directed at whether its better for WWPB to stand on its own merits or be compared with Pine Valley.  IMO that's a different question than if the 2 courses are comparable.  

[mike_malone]

 I will have to listen the next time they air this one. It certainly struck me as a sales pitch from the course. They may have focused on the "inspiration" but I heard "comparable".

[Mark Brown]

I haven't played shadow creek, but I think Pine Barrens is Fazio's best course and the greens are quite treacherous - a lot of risk-reward options.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()