the tour vs. Pine Valley

[rj struthers]

OK,OK, no more fighting about Jesper vs. the world!  I was kind of surprised that no one at the Philly Open threw up a real low score at PV, given that the greens weren't tricked up. No one went low, not for 18, let alone 36 at medal play.  

I pose this question and think I have my answer. Assuming tougher conditions than the GAP guys experienced, what would the winning score be for a US OPEN setup??

Looking forward to hearing from the treehouse!

[Paul Richards]

My guess is probably 13-15 under par, unless Tiger goes nuts like he did at Pebble in the Open.  Then it's more like -22 or so.

[Mike_Cirba]

Archie,

Given that I doubt Pine Valley would ever consent to a US Open type setup, with narrowed fairways bordered by high rough (which would be so totally inconsistent with the architectural philosophy of the course), I'll assume that we'll stick with very slick greens and tough hole locations as the setup, with current fairway widths.

Given the par of 70, I think a winning score might be in the 270 range, with a WIDE variance in scoring between those who hold it together and those who succumb to the psychological pitfalls the course throws at the player at every turn.  

[archie]

Mike,

I'm not going to weigh in yet, although I must admit I was surprised at the Valleys' resistance to scoring in the GAP Open. Trust me some of these guys can really play. Don't think you have to narrow all but a couple of the fairways, maybe #'s2 & 12!!!!!!!

[Matt_Ward]

Archie:

I agree with Mike -- if PV played as it was originally designed and you only increased green speed I can't see how the world's best would not be in the 265-270 range. Once these guys dial in with the yardages and get the flatstick talking you can bet a few of them will be in the low 60's on any round.

I saw firsthand what the USGA did to Bethpage Black in order to keep these guys at bay. Fast and even highly contoured greens like PV's would not put them off by much -- if at all. Yes, a few would probably shoot a high number but the pyscho babble about the aura and all the rest would mean very little to those who are among the world's elite.

No disrespect to PV but these "guys are good."

Just an opinion.

[George Pazin]

Having never played the course, this opinion probably isn't worth much...

HOWEVER,

I think you guys give the tour pros too much credit for the wrong things. Sure, they dial in the distance on the boring flat greened courses they play week in & week out, but I think truly difficult greens, especially if kept firm & fast, give them trouble almost no matter how short the course. Els & Duval struggled big time at Cherokee Plantation a few years back on Shell's WWoG & they played it at about 6500 yards. I think what truly separates the tour player from the top amateurs is their scrambling & their ability to pull a 70 when they should be shooting 75. Once you start talking about a round below, say, 67, it's more about putting than anything else, and judging by what you guys say about PV, it doesn't sound like the damn near dead straight putts you see the big boys hitting on the highlight shows every week. Heck, the Putt of the Week on TGC seems pretty darn straight every week to me.

If the course was set up as difficult as it could be, I doubt they'd break 270.

Now I await Patrick to tell me how wrong I am...

[Tom_Egan]

Recently acquired KNOWLEDGE, reinforcing my inate LOGIC, and supported by irrefutable FACTS, leads me to my OPINION that the winning score would be THIRTY (30) strokes -- or FIFTEEN (15) strokes per round -- higher than the winning score in the actual event.

That is just my opinion, though, and therefore probably wrong.

[Mike_Cirba]

Just because I predicted a 270 (-10) winning score doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a wonderful tournament and whoever was able to win across that great track would be surely deserving.

I think Duval finished about -10 at Lytham last year, and it was a fabulous tournament over a great course.   Even when Tiger scorched TOC at -19 in perfectly still weather and won by a slew of shots, it was a joy to watch.  

Let's just say that I'm quite sure that no one would leave PV complaining that it was too easy, or didn't provide an adequate challenge.  

Contrary to the USGA's "protection of par" philosophy, I see nothing wrong with a course where a small handful of hot, talented players can shoot some good scores if they manage the course and their games well.

[mike_malone]

I realize that Rolling Green is no P.V.'but Jim Furyk was there today.He played from the middle tees,but had 8 birds in 16 holes.I do not know whether he had  any  bogies,but i must say this makes me think "these guys are good".If he played the last two he probably would have shot 62.I believe that is the course record.
  I also agree that the greens  here as at P.V.are the main defense,they were slow today.

[TEPaul]

I have no real feel for what a winning score might be but I think a few on here both overestimate what tour pros can do on various courses and those same people underestimate Pine Valley.

There are two primary factors that contributed to the higher than expected scores in the Philly Open, in my opinion.

First, when you make a mistake at Pine Valley even a very good player does not have the ability to consistently recover his mistake without a dropped shot or two like they can on more normal courses. Sorry fellows but PV can be so different that way you really do have to know it to understand that.

Second, the greens of Pine Valley would drive those tour pros crazy. I heard the scoop that the tour pros that visited Waynesborough on the tour stop here last year said that Waynesborough's green were like almost nothing they've ever seen on tour. Waynesborough's greens are pretty good and quite interesting (some of them anyway) but they aren't remotely in the same ball park as Pine Valley's.

Those two factors are Pine Valley's primary defense and even for tour pros those defenses properly set up would do more in keeping down low scoring than most on here would imagine, in my opinion.

Oh, yeah, one other thing that people forget at a course like PV as far as going under par. It's a par 70 and even for the tour pros the two par 5s are basically unreachable in two!

[TEPaul]

Just wrote an instant email to Ben Dewar on this subject and there is a reality to Pine Valley with today's tour caliber players that would very likely prevent the course ever holding a US Open even if the club was willing and they could figure out how to get that many people on and around the course (which I really don't believe they ever possibly could).

That is that for a tour caliber player (certainly someone like Tiger Woods) to play the course effectively he would never be able to use a driver during the tournament!

The only hole a tour caliber player would consider a driver would be on #15 and possibly #16 but basically that's it and I really do mean that! Using a driver on any other hole is possible I suppose but basically for players of that tee shot length it really just makes no sense at all. Frankly, although a player of Woods's length could probably technically hit #15 in two shots, in competition I doubt he would even try! Day in and day out he would probably score better on that hole not trying to reach the green in two!

I really don't think the USGA or valid golf analysts would accept something like that (effectively no drivers for some tour pros) which to me is a shame. Part of the fascination to me for players who are long is figuring out strategically how to play the course from the tees. It took much more thought for a player like Jay Sigel from the tees than it did for me, for instance, who can (and probably has to) use driver from most of the tees.

For those who believe taking the driver out of a player's hands is a bad thing Pine Valley is just not the course--not even close. But that to me doesn't exactly mean the course is too short technically and certanly that does not make it easy to play--just that controlling effective tee shot length and figuring out the club to do it for very long players can be a bit more complex at Pine Valley than other courses.

It's sort of an interesting wrinkle that transitions the course (and its ability to hold down low scoring) into today's world in a rather fascinating way! Unfortunately, it's a way that Mr Crump clearly did not have in mind--and one he would be very disappointed in, I'm sure!

Crump was a good and very dedicated golfer and the club he loved the most--far more than any other was his driver! He designed much of the course to use driver to get the ball far enough out there to make the "very slim margin for error" second and approach shots more likely to succeed!  

I feel if he was around today Crump would probably be one of the strongest advocates of controlling the distance the ball travels.

But how Pine Valley fits into the scheme of the far greater distances the ball goes today is much more complex than on most other courses and most people realize.

[Bruceski]

Not directly relevant to this topic, but I thought it might interest some. Taken directly from the official web site of Tiger Woods:

"Did you know, the Golf Course Tiger would most like to play is Pine Valley Golf Club in New Jersey. 'I've always wanted to play there.''"

[TEPaul]

If he's always wanted to play there all he probably needs to do is find the time--he certainly knows who to call!

[SPDB]

i should think that 007 would gladly host him.

[Bruceski]

Tiger would love to play there. It only costs $2 Million to get him there.  

[archie struthers]

I think the recent GAP Open at Pine Valley surprised me as to its difficulty. More than anything, it confirmed my opinion that PV is the greatest home court advantage in golf, and no degree of ball striking talent can overpower the golf course. It should make my good looper buddies feel good that a keen knowledge of the greens and a deft putting touch is paramount to all else. At the Valley, you need more than a good yardage to dial in a score.

Remember, this golf course was playing about 6700 yards and the greens were not at warp speed. Only one round under par over 36 holes!  Basically unreachable par fives and a terrible penalty for wayward tee balls, even on a big golf course(width) makes for tough sledding. I believe it was Herbert Warren Wind who said only God should be the arbiter of eternal punishment after playing here.

This for me was strictly a mental exercise relative to the tour, but I applaud Mr. Brewer for having the GAP Event, as it was great for local golf!

I think that with greens at US Open speeds, and some tough pin and tee placements Pine Valley would be resistant to low scoring over the four rounds, as the dual pressures of staight hitting and putting would weigh on the players mightily.

My score for the four rounds (-7)

[rhobbs]

In response to the post about the Pro players only using driver twice in a round at PVGC.  You are dead on.  When Davis Love played a round there he removed his driver and three wood and added another wedge and a one iron.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Pazin,

When two or four pros come to play a course, the resulting scores are usually reflective of the current state of their game, so if Els and Duval struggled, their games may not have been at their best.

But, when a field of 150 PGA TOUR pros descend on a golf course, some are off their game, some are transitioning for the better or worse, and some are on their game.

Those that are on their game make the cut and those that are really playing their best, lead the field and win the tournament.

I think that those that are on their game that week would score exceptionally well, just like they do 52 weeks a year.

When the BEST of the BEST in the WORLD are on their game no course, without an assist from the elements, can keep them from going low.

[Bob_Huntley]

Patrick is right. Most of our golf spectating is done at home watching television. What do we see? The cut is made, those players not on form are eliminated. Seventy two players take up the challenge. We then see a montage of shots from no more than eight to ten players within a few shots of the lead. They all hit spectacular shots and putt like angels, but these are the players at the very top of their games. We then think that the bulk of the Tour is made up of supermen. Even the most skilled hit some very poor shots and in some cases their course management stinks.

I strongly believe the only defense against the top notch players, on form, are pot bunkers and lots of them.

[SPDB1]

Patrick - The Cherokee Plantation match was played following the Masters where Els and Duval finished 2 and 3 respectively.

Isn't it possible, then, that the struggle was posed by the course and not the current states of their games?

I, for the most part, agree with what you are saying but would be reluctant to make the categorical assessment that you do.

For instance, a bunch of "top notch" guys go out to PV and struggle. How do we know how much of that can be credited to the "states of their games" and how much can be attributed to the difficulty posed by the golf course?

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB1,

I've seen guys win a tournament one week and not make the cut the next, and guys who don't make the cut one week play spectacular the next.

As you know, golf is a fleeting game, and casual rounds, paid for in advance aren't the same as a PGA TOUR competition.

[mike_malone]

I mentioned yesterday that Jim Furyk ate up Rolling Green .Now i remember that one of our asst.pros who told me about his round said"Well he is in the  top 20 in the world"At the time i did not think much of his comment.
 But apropos of this threads point ---how pros would score at P.V.i checked and Furyk is #12 in the world.So it is not just that someone is "on the  tour" because there is a wide spread on the tour.
  Comments have been made that Parnevik is or is not   ten shots better than some good amateur or local pro.
 Look at these figures.Tiger's stroke average is 5 better than the last guy  on the  pga list--68.73 vs.73.81.That is stunning to me.The #100 guys on the list are averaging71.2.That is still 2.5 per round.
  So the tour has a wide spread between the best and the last.
 It makes a difference WHO plays P.V.

[PGertner]

Arch..

The only problem I see with "warp speed greens" is the USGA's desire to keep all Open greens a consistent speed.  If this would be the case, speeds couldn't be too much faster than they were for The Philly Open, due to the severe green contours.  (#2 comes to mind)
  
By the way....I say -10.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[George Pazin]

mayday's stats are the most compelling yet in an attempt to back up Patrick's 10 shot story from Rick Hartman.

HOWEVER,

I still think that there are far too many instances of tournaments won on relatively short courses (ie not 7300 yard par 70 US Open) types with scores not dipping into double digits below par to assume the scoring would automatically be below 270.

Think about the course - what holes would obviously be under par? Certainly the course lacks the requisite 4 pushover par 5s that most tour venues provide, with only two virtually unreachable par 5s. Heck, I'd bet par 5 scoring is the biggest single reason when tournaments approach 15 or 20 under. Also, most venues have much easier recovery opportunities to manage one's mistakes. Tour pros average maybe 65% GIR - does anyone out there want to make the case that PV's recovery opportunities are easier than just about any other course in the US?

In the end I think the only way 270 is broken is if Tiger pulls an Open like the one in 2000 - when he plays like that in conditions like that, no course on earth can offer any defense.

[archie]

Patrick G., great to hear from you! We're pretty close as to score as -7/-10 are in the same zip code. However, you surely remember Bators' revenge when no one , including a 40 year old Jay Sigel could  handle the place. Certainly a U.S. Open set-up would be harder than it was for the Philly Open. I don't know how many times George P. has been to the Valley but his analysis is right on. You are not going to pencil in automatic birdies on the five pars, you will not have easy up and downs and if they grow the rough at all, my minus 7 is way too low!