They are number 1 and 2 on the GD list, with Pine Valley the perennial #1.  Shinnecock gets more love on GCA, or so it seems to me.  This may be because the Flynn lobby is so strong and there is no countervailing Pine Valley lobby, perhaps because Crump only did one course.

In any case, if you were a rater which is better - Pine Valley or Shinnecock Hills?

Phil:

For what it's worth -- read Doak's assessment on SH on "Confidential Guide." Believe it sums up things nicely.

SH has the capacity to test the world's premier players with little hands-on help from man. Not to take anything away from PV but if one were to judge a course from its overall wherewithal to handle all types of play then SH gets the clear edge in my book.

That's like asking which is a better animal, a cheetah or a horse?  How can anyone rank these two courses?  One can describe their positive and negative qualities; and one can prefer one over the other; but they certainly should not be compared as better or worse, just different.  

I've got to believe that most who think Shinnecock is better have never played Pine Valley. Then maybe they are just New Yorkers. I don't think it is even close.

Tommy W,

Interesting selection of holes that you don't care for.  I like every hole at Shinnecock Hills, and find 9,13 and 18 very good.  Heck, in my opinion the 9th is one of the great par 4s in golf.  But there's room for many opinions and I surely respect yours.

PV holes that are a notch below the others include 11 and 14.  

Sully,

You probably know the two courses better than just about anyone on this site other than Tom Paul.  I am intrigued why you think day to day you give the nod to Shinnecock and for tournaments you select Pine Valley.  I would think for a golfer of your skill, you would select SH for competitive play.  Wait till the green expansions are done, you might change your mind.  Let's get together and go over the ongoing work.

Jim L,

Not even close?  I don't know why you say that, especially since we are dealing in the subjective and not the objective.  I could never be taken for a New Yorker but I think Shinnecock Hills a slightly better course than Pine Valley.  I like Merion better than PV as well but they are so close in my mind that there is no real discernible difference.  Different courses for different golfers.

In what way(s) is PV superior to SH?  A strong statement like that needs to be explored further.

In a Ran Morrissett match play scenario, I judge PV versus SH thusly:

1. even     10. SH
2. PV        11. SH
3. SH        12. SH
4. even     13. PV
5. even     14. SH
6. SH        15. even
7. even     16. even
8. even     17. PV
9. SH        18. PV (barely)

I think if you compare the Par 3's and 5's at each, it is pretty even. However Pine Valley wins on its Par 4's, all of which are very good to great and many you have never seen before in any way or anyplace.

I am also a sucker for "retreat golf".

OK, I'll retract the comment about it not being close, since I can't prove it.

Let me say up front that I have never played Cypress Point. I think I have played of of the other legitimate candidates for America's best course. Of all the courses I've played, Pine Valley is the only one that if I got an invitation to play tomorrow, I would drop whatever I'm doing and catch the next plane or drive the 9 hours to play again. For all the others I would need at least a few days advance notice.

Using that scientific method,  I judge no course to be close to Pine Valley.

I also like Shinnecock and Merion a lot, and I rate them both in my top 5. It is rarely mentioned, but the one negative that I find with Merion is that you have to cross a heavily traveled street twice in each round.

BTW, speaking of Ran, I just spoke to him and his family at a local restaurant. I never have bought his hole-by-hole match play as a reliable method of comparing courses.

Jim

I will dare to say that once the green expansions and other restoration work is completed at Shinnecock Hills that it will be considered the best course in America by a significant number of those seriously interested in golf architecture.  It is great now but will be improved merely by going back to what once was.

Tommy W,

Interesting selection of holes that you don't care for.  I like every hole at Shinnecock Hills, and find 9,13 and 18 very good.  Heck, in my opinion the 9th is one of the great par 4s in golf.  But there's room for many opinions and I surely respect yours.

 

Wayne,  I know that these holes are highly regarded.  I also hold them in high regard.  For me they a good off the tee but  are too uphill for the second shot.  I know they wanted to get back to the clubhouse but not every finishing hole has to end on the same elevation as the cluhouse.  I like the green of thirteen but the drive and second shot are not up to the level of the rest of the course.  Of course, i am splitting hairs of excellent golf holes on an outstanding course.  So for me it isn't that the holes are not good I just don't love them.

If I were to pick two holes at PV that don't make my heart sing they would be 14 & 16.  As with the holes in question they are good holes they just don't do much for me.  One of my favorite hole at PV is 17.  I love the second shot.

I suspect that there are a lot of great holes that others don't particularly like.

I find it very difficult to put PV or Shinny above the other while denigrating one or the other.  Personally, my ranking is Sand Hills, PV, Shinny, Merion, and then a slight drop off.  I have a feeling Shinny with the green expansions could change my opinion--they are that close to begin with.  How would the addition of Sebonic affect a Shinny vs. PV ranking?
That seems to be from left field.  I cannot make a  conclusive judgement about Sebonic, but it is not getting the feedback that Friars Head receives from the people I know who have played them both.  As great as I think Friars Head is, it is a couple notches below Shinny--which is still far above many other great courses.

Wayne should recuse himself on this one.  Both are 10's in my book.  

If you are going to side with the course that's playable by all classes of players, you've got to go with Shinnecock.  

If you are going to side with the course that has the best variety of holes in all of golf, you've got to go with Pine Valley.

If forced to choose between them, I don't know how I could go with Shinnecock, considering that when I am in its neighborhood I'm always more inclined to go and play National.

I think Tom Doak's post above says a lot about how to compare these two courses in a general sense.

I'm also glad to hear that these two courses are ranked #1 and #2 by GD. If GD wanted to flip their positions from time to time that'd be OK with me because I think both courses are great in their own way and I don't give a damn about magazine rankings anyway.  

To me the interesting thing about their #1 and #2 ranking is they are such different courses and architectural styles in so many ways, and that despite the fact there is (or was) one small architectural factor about Flynn's Shinnecock that was taken from Pine Valley.

I know both courses well over a lot of years and it's certainly no knock at all on Shinnecock to say if I did a hole by hole match play comparison for my preferences Pine Valley would win about six up.

I say that while admitting that I think I can legitimately find something good and positive to say about the architecture and strategic concept of every single hole on both golf courses. That alone is pretty rare, in my opinion.

In an historical sense, I think Pine Valley's place in golf architecture is more dramatic as it was a course that made an immense impact on the world of golf and architecture right out of the box. Not that it was generally copied but it's hard to deny it made a huge impact on the world of architecture.

I think it's fair to say that Shinnecock grew on the world of architecture to its current status much more slowly over time----which frankly may be the more interesting fact to study and analyze as to why and how.

And I'd add to that there is plenty about both courses that depict their positions at basically either end of the era of the Golden Age----and that fact may be the most interesting of all to study in an architectural sense for such as us----eg looking at the styles of the holes of either course is almost like looking at a microcosm of how the Golden Age of Architecture itself evolved throughout its own era. (this is made sort of ironic by the fact that the course that may've started it all (Golden Age) in America is immediately juxtaposed to Shinnecock and not Pine Valley).

If one thought this means I like Pine Valley better than Shinnecock I wouldn't say that. I admire them both and their architecture a helluva lot but for differing reasons.

For a bonus comparison I'd say both Shinnecock's clubhouse and its relationship to the golf course wins hands down.  

Another thing that may be notable is both courses over the years have been not much screwed around with architecturally other than lengthening (compared to some other bigtime American courses). I think that says a lot about both golf courses---or maybe just their clubs.

And I say this recognizing that about 90% of what carries the day on PV's first hole is the green and green-end.

Tom,

Hey I was really just trying to throw a life jacket to Wayne!

I have only been there once, but I was surprised that the first hole at PV was visually cut off from the tee. Call me a closet Fazio fan, but I appreciate the first at National, Sand Hills, Shinnecock and Yale where you get a sense of the course from the first tee. Based on 1 play, I can't agree or argue about the green on #1, as I was just happy to be on it at that point!