Adam, I am still not convinced that the Pinion Hills' design dictates firm and fast playing conditions.  

Yes the course does have many open fronts but surely open fronts do not necessarily mean that the course is designed for the ground game.   Instead. the fronts could exist to give the shorter player who cant make it on (your example) a place to safely miss.

Whether open front or not, I just can't believe that most of those greens were designed with the ground game in mind.   Moreover, I doubt that any but the very best could put enough spin on mid to long irons to hold those green levels if they were firm.  I know I couldnt.   So I guess I just dont believe that drying out the course would create many options around the greens.  In contrast, I do think that drying and firming the greens might take away the option for which the greens were designed.

As for the mounding, isnt most of the mounding in the rough?  Unless the Super is willing to take the course to barely alive the ball is still not going to run much through the think rough that I recall.  Plus, arent many of the mounds adjacent to large swales (presumably the dirt for the mounds) which would simply collect rolling balls.  When I played the course I guess I just assumed that the mounding was placed to create awkward lies and difficult recoveries for those who missed the fairway.  Sort of as replacements for bunkers.  Wasnt this the rage around the time pinion was built?  

As for your friend who cant get home it two, perhaps he would find the course more enjoyable from a more forward tee?  

Adam, I absolutely love firm and fast conditions but just dont think that there are many modern courses designed for such.  I would never have thought Pinion such a course until reading your past posts on the course.  

Again, I havent played the course in some time, so I could be all wrong.   If so, please set me straight

David- I am a bit confused by your last post. We were never discussing PH, to begin with, but since you're asking.

 I believe I stated in an earlier reply that the slight difference between too much h2o, and the ideal maintenance meld for PH, isn't all that much. Yes, the mounds have rough grass on them and the greenside mounds have that standard 3-4 foot collar. Above that, the thicker 3-4 inch rough lies. My point, and after speaking with Ken Dye & Bill Freimuth , is that they intended for the mounds to serve as kickplates. Inorder to get to certain pinable locations on the seriously sectioned greens. Some of the pinnable shelves, are so small (like on the orig 18th) that the only way to get it close, is off the kickplate, short and right over the bunker. Under current practices, the ball ends-up where the ball lands. Is that good golf?
Another residual...
When the group came last fall, John V made a great observation when trying to extricate himself from one of the lush grass scoop-outs on the short par 5 13th. He noticed that he'd have been better off, missing his tee-shot by a bigger margin, because the lie in the native would be more playable. Now that's just poor gca under those conditions.

Jeff:

Guess what partner?

I'll be waiting for the fines to be collected because the courses I've played over the last 5-10 years in the greater NY metro area for the most part overdose with man applied water. You would not know that because you're in Texas -- I know it because too many times the courses I have played are watered to such a degree that balls are more likely to plug than scamper a good bit down the fairway.

Jeff -- help me stop laughing when you say "get caught." This is the same mentality that exists with the people who believe the cops are zealously guarding the speed limits on the highways and interstates. Yes, there may be a lone club that may get snagged to "make a point", but the greater fear for many superintendents is not the state jumping in with fines, but the members who insist upon such preparation for their respective home club(s).

Jeff said, "That said, I wonder if any super listens to the most typical comments or the typically loudest comments from his players?  ie, could a firm and fast greens chairman really hold sway over the rest of the committee and membership?"

Let me relay a short story I received during an interview from a few years back with Ernie Ransome (former president & chairman of PV) when I asked him about people making comments to the superintendent about course conditions there. Ernie's response was a classic -- he told me that the superintendent is instructed to tell the person who is offering such comments to see Mr. Ransome. Guess what Jeff? Maybe one or two actually ever went to Ernie and registered their complaints. The moral of the story -- listen to too many people and the result is chaos. At PV there was with Ransome a "first" among equals who was entrusted to review what was taking place at the club. If clubs are indeed smart they limit the democratization to other matters and avoid the issues that arise when too many people are commenting on such a core issue as course preparation. The Ransome model at PV is one to follow in my mind.

Jeff -- when you say who made GolfClubAtlas or Matt Ward king the answer is no one. But unlike a good number of people on this site I actually traverse this country on a fairly continuous basis and my opinions come from personal observations not just couch potato musings.

Quote from: Michael Dugger on May 17, 2004, 03:01:40 PM

Instead, he reads a little dialogue on GCA.com and gets his panties in a bunch.  

Mdug,

What Adam has said about Pinion and how it is managed is beyond a little dialogue.  If I am correct...it seems Adam had dialogued verbally, electronically and by hand.....this is more than the casual observation of some visitor....it is serious stuff and somebody is not going to be at Pinion much longer....if that be Adam it be his choice...the other guys aren't so lucky.

Jaka,

Are you trying to claim that gca.com carries a lot of clout?  

Hmm, I wish that were true.

My only point was that one attracts more bees with honey.  The super could have come to Adam with a slighty better attitude.  One that is conducive to growth.

But, this seems quite obvious, right?    

I do not feel we are overly harsh on supers. Generally, they do the best they can with the budget the membership or owner allows for. However I find the profession often looks at life more like a contractor when it come to cleanup details and oversight. The super runs the show at our club and has for over 20 years. he generally does a good job but  it takes an act of god to get change no matter how obvious the issue.

John V.'s dilemna is the norm at just about every dry area course which has both thick n' thirsty rough bordering sparse playable native.  Are you suggesting that Ken Dye designed the course to be without rough?   NO, did you infer that?

As for the "kick-plates" around the greens, that seems stretching it a bit if you ask me. I suppose you are challenging me on what Ken said to me? Shall I ask him to call you?  After all the ball might not come out even of the rough were dryer. ahh, the crux of the matter. I don't know if you saw it, but a few weeks ago the esteemed Tom Paul made reference to this exact "bounce" from rough that denoted a perfect meld. I guess we agree that one man's kick plates are another man's framing and containment mounding.  

After sharing a meal with Baxter Spann and hearing the wonderful story about how Joe Finger was given the task of re-creating the eighth green at ANGC. I am of the opinion that the mounding Ken may or may not have over-done in his career, is directly related to that Joe Finger job. Perhaps a more in-depth study is needed? Can anyone get me onto ANGC so I can see how the mounds on the 8th play, it may or may not help prove my theory?

Adam,

 I do think viewing the mounds around some of the greens at Pinion as an integral part of a 'firm and fast' design is stretching it.  David, Are the words Fand Fast anywhere in my posts on PH? I stated the difference is smaller than at courses in other climatic regions. In many cases, they would have to act not as a kick plate, but a spring-loaded backboard, bouncing the ball directly back on the line from which it came.  Arent there swales, bunkers, and indentations between the green and some of the mounds?  Arent many of the mounds set well away from the fairways and greens? Do you remember the course or not? How many is many? The kickplates, as I said already, are for specific pin locations and they have the versatility to be used accordingly depending on conditions. Not all mounds serve as a kickplates.I feel as though you'd rather joust over semantics than catch my drift.

As for TEPaul's perfect maintenance meld, I think it a handy notion, but I surely do not take TEPaul's directives as gospel when it comes to looking at architecture. I do. But that's because I knew exactly what he is talking about when he gave that exact description of the ball bouncing out of thick rough, BECAUSE THE SUB SURFACE HAD THE RIGHT CONSISTENCY. If ytou had seen it maybe then it would be a  Especially in cases where his thoughts are being applied to courses which he as never seen. Fundamentals are universal.  

But perhaps we got off on the wrong track here. n/s  I like PinionReally? What do you like about it architecturally?  

That being said,  In my recollection Pinion is not a links course, nor is it an extremely strategic course.  It relies on severly tiered greens (usually three tiers) and numerous mounds and 'grass bunkers.'   (Surely these deep grass bunkers in the rough are not consistent with your position.

And the mounds, or many of them, just arent positioned to provide for creative kicks.   As I said above, many of the mounds are past the green.  Others have a sand or grass bunker between them and the green or fairway.  I just cant figure out how these enter into a firm and fast scheme.  

Adam,  in the spirit of the back nine at Pacific Grove, do you really think that Pinion was built to play firm and fast?  Once again, the degree of firmness is relative. But I can tell you this David. When Pinon Hills is f&f, core values are exposed. For me that is spelled FUN

David, I think Ken Dye drew on many genres and created a golf course that is enjoyable for all levels of golfers. The fact that you don't see the versatility in the design must be a function of how many rounds and under what conditions those rounds were golfed under. I won't sit here and tell you your opinion is wrong, but I do think your recollection is off.

Gentlemen, I started this thread more in the spirit of John Bernhardts answer, but I can see it has generated into a more. Honestly, all I wanted to do was show how I stuck-up for Ran. With two kids in his house and one was born right after the new mexcio outing, he surely knows shit.

Wille, typical of most muni courses, probably the county board of supervisors, possibly with a sub committee of parks and rec dept.  Usually, those committees have supervisors and sometimes have citizen appointees, and sometimes have the golf course super as a member, or on hand as the exec. to answer their "insightful" turf-course management questions.

Honestly, all I wanted to do was show how I stuck-up for Ran.

So, is this just an exercise in sucking-up so us supers will know how to do that better too?  

Joe

Look Adam, you are there and I am not so you certainly know the watering situation better than I do.  So I dont doubt you when you say that the course would play better with a little less water.  No one likes to play in slop.

Yet I disagree with the way we on this website sometimes try to wedge every fun modern course into the neo-classical, firm-fast camp.  Whatever Ken Dye is building now, he just did not build that type of course in Farmington.  I very much doubt he would disagree with me.  

As for your specific questions and comments:

David, Are the words Fand Fast anywhere in my posts on PH?

I dont recall.  But I do recall you talking about playing run-up shots, playing balls off of mounds and watching them bounce and roll, and using kick plates to get to certain pin placements.

Do you remember the course or not? How many is many?

I think I remember the course very well, but it has been a number of years since I played it so please correct me on any details I misrecollect.  As I remember, virtually all of the fairways on the longer holes rely extensively on mounding and grass hollows, with the possible exception of what used to be No. 10, the downhill dogleg left with the water right of the green.  (I recall a long bunker down the left side but dont remember what was on the right side or through the dogleg.)  

Also, I remember that the vast majority of the greens incorporated grass mounding and hollows into their surrounds.  The exceptions might be the old No. 10, the par 5 in the middle of the old front (guarded by water left of the green), and the short par 3 over a rocky arroyo to the long thin green complex cut into the side of a hill.

So, to answer your question, 'many' means dozens.  Possibly over 100 if we count mounds and hollows seperately.
 
I recall the mounding on the back tier of what was 18, but never had occasion to use it as a kick plate.  I can see how this is possible, but even so I think this is the exception and not the rule.  

I do [take TEPaul's words as gospel]. But that's because I knew exactly what he is talking about when he gave that exact description of the ball bouncing out of thick rough, BECAUSE THE SUB SURFACE HAD THE RIGHT CONSISTENCY. If ytou had seen it maybe then it would be a [?] Fundamentals are universal.

 

Fundamentals may be universal, but application of those fundamentals is certainly not.  

What do you like about it architecturally?

As I remember . . .
-I like the routing.  The site seemed like it may have been difficult, yet the course flows very nicely.  
-I like the constant variation in holes, direction, and terrain. (same as routing, I guess)
-I like that he could have overdone forced carries and greens/tees perched on rocks, but that he showed restraint.  The few holes where he does use forced carries and the rock arroyos are done nicely without killing the high handicapper.  
-I like that the water on the course isnt there for cosmetic enhancement, but instead is placed guarding greens, very much in play.  I also like that one can negotiate around it and not be forced over it.
-I like the walk . . . very enjoyable and not too difficult given the site.
-Most significantly (in my opinion) I like that he did not  fight the land much when building the course.  While I found the humps and hollows over the top, the course still feels somewhat natural and certainly flows up and down and around with the land.  
-And I like very much that he did it for 1.2 million, or whatever it was.  

David, I think Ken Dye drew on many genres and created a golf course that is enjoyable for all levels of golfers. The fact that you don't see the versatility in the design must be a function of how many rounds and under what conditions those rounds were golfed under. I won't sit here and tell you your opinion is wrong, but I do think your recollection is off.

Perhaps you are correct regarding my recollection.  I have played the course a minimum of 15 rounds and probably a few over 20.  Always in the spring or early summer, never in bad whether.  The course was never firm and fast, but was never soft either.  

I agree that the course is enjoyable for all levels of golfers, but this can be accomplished in a number of ways, not just by designing for the ground ball.  

Frankly, I see a pretty consistant 'genre' throughout.  I dont recall many non-three teir greens.  I recall most of the greens had a shape like Mickey Mouse heads in a fun house mirror--  A central roundish tier with two additional roundish tiers extending off the central one.   I see repeated use of fairways lined with humps and hollows and greens guarded with the same.  

As for the Ran, he needs no defending.  Insults usually say more about the speaker than the subject.    

__________________

Matt, I recall some vertical strategy; whether to go for it on the longer holes, what club to hit off the tee; negotiating wind and hills, etc.  As for horizontal strategy, I can see how favoring one side of a fairway would come in handy if the pin was on the opposite ear.  I guess I was considering this more necessity than strategy, but it is fair to call it strategy.  Still though, it would be too much of a stretch for me to concede that the course was 'extremely strategic' (the words used above.)

I do agree that different options are available from different tees, but I dont consider this as enhancing the strategy.  

Corey- That is out of the question.  These people (managememnt) are already on record for saying they contacted Ken. As I understand it, he never recieved any call.

David, There are multiple features on the ground at Pinon. Use them or don't. But please do not take away the ability to use them. And, you do realize that this is the high desert? Where temps and et rates make for growing anything, a true lesson in due diligence. Dye fired the original shaper because he didn't get the rolls right. He also was present for each greens final shaping. If he says he intended the course to play with bounce and roll, your suspicions are irrelevant.

Joe- This was getting way out of control I wanted to reign it in, alittle.

Pat Mucci, Once again, in this case it's a lesson in futility/ However, I did go and tour my new home course with the super yesterday ( a different guy) and was very receptive and appreciative for the in-put. Mostly because he is not a golfer.
 If anything is the real issue here it is, how do supers, without extensive playing experience,  learn what makes golf fun? Read about it?

Mr. Sweeney, Yes I do. While I enjoy your spirit, I question your examples.

As I know it, Tom Fazio has only designed one course played on the pga tour and that was at Mirasol, quite recently.  


Obviously, you miss my point.

As George Pazin has perfectly paraphrased, I too am one of the good guys. I appreciate how hard it is to be a super, all aspects. I respect, immensly, almost all of those who I've met. But as is true in other facets of life, not everyone can be all things to all people, so yes I have met a few who I wouldn't call to the witness stand.

Seth Raynor knew how to move dirt. Did he start out designing?