[TEPaul]

Rich:

Some think Pine Valley is in New Jersey but it's probably more appropriate to call its location the Region of the Golf Association of Philadelphia! 

JohnV:

GAP's radius is 150 miles from Penn's Hat and if that reaches out to Harrisburg and Hershey then those clubs are eligible for membership.

[JESII]

In fact, so would Winged Foot and Congressional...

[TEPaul]

Sully:

I should amend that. It's 150 miles from Penn's Hat "as the crow flies". Providing the crow hasn't had a bunch of drinks and flies straight I have had my eye on GCGC!

[Dan Herrmann]

Rich-Nice Warren Zevon reference.

Mike-Has anyone designed a course around the Albany Pine Bush?

Wow - look at http://www.albanypinebush.org/

How did golf miss this area?

Here's a picture of the area:

[archie_struthers]

 

It woudl be pretty cool if they opened up the left sode of #13 , it probably could be a lot like the ditch on the right side of six , but more severe.

As to "splendid isolationaism"  it really works at Pine Valley ...but certainly isn't as awe inspiring as ocean views or mountains in the distance ...interestingly my memories of SandHills gave me a feeling of separation yet there are some awesome views >   

[TEPaul]

Archie:

I'm sorry; ARCHIE STRUTHERS;

I think taking out enough trees on the fall-off along the right of #6 so golfers from the tee could get a little peak at the green or flag (as well as those cool bunkers around the bend) would be awesome aesthetically as well as in play psychologically but unlike #13 on the left they would need to take care on #6 down at the green-end not to go too far or they might expose a roof or something like that.

[Rich Goodale]

Rich-Nice Warren Zevon reference.

Mike-Has anyone designed a course around the Albany Pine Bush?

Bill

Any Warren Zevon reference was entirely accidental, but I am glad it was nice.  Can you enlighten me as to what I inadvertently referenced?  Thanks.

Rich

[Jim Nugent]

"Did Crump plant any or many of PV's trees?   I'm curious where they all came from."

JimN:

The site had plenty of trees when Crump found the place even though most all of them were pretty small compared to today. He removed apparently 40--50,000 trees basically to route or just look at potential landforms for holes (some of which were not used). Following that a number of trees were planted and the archives even record what kind of trees they were. 

Did Crump intend that Pine Valley's holes would have so many trees around them? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

The burr under my saddle has been the effect this syndrome has had on older courses built on relatively small sites - say less than 130 or 140 acres. Isolation is no problem when the course sits on 250 acres. The fetish that greens committees had in the 60s-90s to plant trees along fairway borders to improve safety or to increase difficulty has gutted a lot of the original strategies as well as made the courses visually repetitive; supers can attest to the impact these trees have had on turf conditions.

I suspect the USGA may have had some culpability in this, years ago advising clubs to plant trees as a protection from wayward shots. Sadly, some architects keep encouraging this stuff - or at least shy away from advising clubs that this isn't a good idea anymore.

Craig,

I agree with you.

If one examines the photo in the main room, hanging by the door to the parking lot, and, the photos of Pine Valley in Geoff Shackelford's book, "The Golden Age of Golf Design",  you'll see Pine Valley as it was intended to be, and not the Pine Valley that suffered from benign neglect.

The photos, circa 1925 probably depict Pine Valley at it's best.

Subsequently, many of the sandy areas, bunkers and areas in play were allowed to vegetate.

Tree removal with an eye toward returning the golf course to its 1925 configuration would be a noble goal.

What many forget, or never see, is that the topography itself is an isolating factor

[BCrosby]

Rich raises a very good question. And I agree with Pat. Such a big happy family we are.

The splendid isolation thing is an idee fixe at many US clubs. People like the isolation. They feel very strongly about it. Suggesting even the thinning of trees meets with considerable resistance at many courses.

To some extent I don't blame these people. Until a decade or so ago, everyone, including most architects, thought isolating each hole was a goal to be sought.

Most architects have changed their tune about that, but clearing out trees is still a new and troubling idea for most golfers. They actually don't like the openness.

So it is a real political issue at most clubs. And it needs to be answered in ways that are reasonable and don't sound condescending.

BTW, I don't think there is a PV Syndrome. Few have seen the course. It's never been on TV. The syndrome really relates to "beautification" programs undertaken by literally every club in the US in the 50's and 60's.

Bob 

[Rich Goodale]

Good points, Bob.  Thanks.

I must argue with your conclusion that the PV syndrome had little effect on GCA.  Even though most of us have not seen the course except on TV, just like Augusta, we are influenced by it's characteristics.  That fact that the course has been ranked #1 for most years in golf magazines should not be discounted.  Any developer of any new course will look at the rankings and be influenced by the characteristics of the leading lights.  No?

Rich

[BCrosby]

Rich -

To fuss with you a bit, PV has rarely been on TV. Few people have an intimate knowledge of the look or feel course. ANGC is an entirely different case re public knowledge of the course.

People didn't have PV in mind as they planted their saplings 50 or so years ago.

I confess, however, that I've never been clear about (a) why people thought such programs were important and (b) why such programs were so pervasive. Virtually no club escaped them. It was if the same light went off in every green chairman's head at the same time everywhere in the US. Very strange. It is equally strange that the same light did not go off in many heads in the UK.

Bob

[Craig Disher]

We could just as easily call the PV syndrome the Oakmont syndrome or the Oak Hill syndrome - or any old-line course with tree-lined fairways that appeared on TV beginning in the late 50s. BTW, why is it that trees appear so often in the names of golf clubs?  Given that, it's not surprising that golfers insist that their course plant a few. But in the 60s and 70s, I think it really went overboard.

Most courses were either cut out of a forest or laid out over farmland. The view down a tree-lined fairway with the shadows and foliage looks better to most people than an empty, rolling field - so why not try to recreate the wooded look?  Arguing against tree planting and for tree removal just doesn't work if architecture is used as the rationale. There is a belief among golfers, particularly those on greens committees (at least those I've known), that the trees offer an appropriate penalty for off-line shots. The "protection" they provide is an added bonus. What's mostly ignored is the toll the trees take on turf. 30' white pines cast a long shadow and they have a pretty big appetite for water. I've seen silver maples planted 25' away from a green that have sent their roots into the irrigation system around it.  Arguing for their removal would be considered heresy, or nuttiness, at most clubs.

[Jim Nugent]

BTW, I don't think there is a PV Syndrome. Few have seen the course. It's never been on TV. The syndrome really relates to "beautification" programs undertaken by literally every club in the US in the 50's and 60's.

Bob 

From a sample of one...when I was a kid, I read about PV isolation syndrome, and how desirable it was.  Never saw the course.  But all these decades later that is still one of two GCA-related things I recall from back then.

The other was Jack Nicklaus talking about building in strategy and risk-reward on golf holes.   

[TEPaul]

"The photos, circa 1925 probably depict Pine Valley at it's best.
Subsequently, many of the sandy areas, bunkers and areas in play were allowed to vegetate."


Patrick:

We've been through this before on this website. Just using that aerial you mentioned as a blueprint for tree removal would be pretty irresponsible. One needs to do some creation and evolution research of that course as to why trees were cleared by Crump in some areas in the first place and why trees and vegetation were put back in some areas later (after around 1925 and that aerial).

Again, in my opinion, the best and most responsible blueprint for tree removal at Pine Valley would simply be to get the trees out of and away from the basic shot lines of all the bunkers.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

You have so much to learn and my time is so limited.

If you'll take the time to examine the photos from 1925, which aren't that different from the photos from 1938, you'll see that most of the invasive tree and underbrush growth has been IN the bunkers or within the large sand wastes.

You can't posture that that was Crump's intent.

Since you don't seem to understand the configuration of the golf course in 1925, I'll allow you 13 years of leeway and take the position that the golf course should be restored to its 1938 configuration.

That's 13 years after the allleged massive plantings.

But, if you look at comparitive photos, you'll quickly see that the 1938 photos don't deviate much from the 1925 photos.

What you refuse to acknowledge, in your blind defense of the powers that were/be at Pine Valley, is that the course was allowed to suffer through benign neglect.

That the course was allowed to become overrun with shrubs, underbrush and trees to the detriment of Crump's design, until such time as "isolation" became a popular fad, and then the process was encouraged.

Before you respond, do everyone a favor and examine the 1925 and the 1938 photos.

Restoring the golf course, tree/shrub/underbrush wise to it's 1938 - 1925 configuration would be a GREAT accomplishment.  Pine Valley would be a better golf course for it.

Don't ever forget that well intentioned men make mistakes in judgement.

It's when other well intentioned men allow those mistakes to remain that bothers me.

Inertia is a powerful force as is resistance to change.

Trees grow imperceptibly slow, no one notices it.
Cutting trees down is seen by everyone, and that's part of the problem, change over time versus immediate change.
The former is permitted, the latter is resisted.

Stop resisting and see the light.

[TEPaul]

"Before you respond, do everyone a favor and examine the 1925 and the 1938 photos."


Pat:

I've done that and more, including much later aerials, constantly for about ten years now, and I guarantee you I know the evolution of that course, the details of it, and the reasons why, including the trees, a whole lot better than you do.

The best blueprint for tree removal at this point is to simply get the trees out of the bunkering and its shot lines.

For a number of reasons including some of Crump's original routing lanes (that were never used) there were cleared areas on that course that show up in early aerials that do not need to be recleared now. Apparently you don't understand what they were or where they were but I do.

And this has nothing whatsoever to do with me defending anyone at Pine Valley, powers there or otherwise. It is simply a thorough analysis of both the creation and evolution of the golf course including the trees beginning from before the course was done, when it was being done and HOW and leading all the way to today which actually includes some tree clearing in the last few years you probably aren't even aware of or where it happened.

[Doug Wright]

"What was the impetus to plant unnecessary and strategically improper trees on classic designs? Michael Fay, Secretary of the Donald Ross Society and author of the book, 'Golf, As It was Meant To Be Played', maintains a plausible theory which he calls the 'Pine Valley Effect'. Over the years many well-to-do and connected golfers made their way to Pine Valley, a vaunted and respected ground for the game. Most of these golfers have always been impressed by the fact that one hole cannot be seen from another at Pine Valley. Unfortunately, too many of these influential individuals returned to their home clubs and started tree planting programs to try to create the Pine Valley look. The problem with this, according to Fay, is that Pine Valley’s golf course sits on over three-hundred(300) acres of land while the average classic course contains anywhere from ninety(90) to one hundred and ten(110) acres. Separating the holes with trees on only one-hundred(100) acres of land inevitably will affect play. Ironically, our course at Blackacre sits upon less than one-hundred(100) acres and many of our members are members of Pine Valley as well. Thus, Fay’s theory perhaps has validity."

The above quote is from the fine GolfClubAtlas In My Opinion Piece called "Below The Trees"   by Mr. Dunlop White.

 http://www.golfclubatlas.com/opionionwhite.html

A well done article worth reading you're interested in the tree issue.

[TEPaul]

Doug:

While some may claim the treelining of American golf courses may be laid at the door of Pine Valley for the reason Michael Fay said I would surely disagree with at least the extent or degree of it for his reason.

Also Pine Valley's golf course is not on 300 acres, it's on less than 184 acres which was the original land purchase by Crump. It was not until 1917 that Crump purchased another app. 400 contiguous acres from the same landowner (Sumner Ireland) and remarkably the reason he gave for that was to build another course just for women.

[Doug Wright]

It was not until 1917 that Crump purchased another app. 400 contiguous acres from the same landowner (Sumner Ireland) and remarkably the reason he gave for that was to build another course just for women.

TE, that Crump was sure an enlightened guy!

[TEPaul]

Doug:

I'm sure he was and I personally believe that was pretty enlightened in that time but I doubt even Mr. Crump himself could sell that idea to Pine Valley today! 

It's not speculation either as the record shows he'd begun to interview the interesting woman golfer Alexa Stirling, for one, on her ideas on the architecture of a top-notch woman's course at Pine Valley.

Coincidently, it was Alexa Stirling and her game that Marion Hollins used as a model to develop concepts and shot lengths and values for her own Woman's National in Long Island. It's actually pretty cool that Marion realized she was obviously too strong and long to be used as an appropriate model and so she tapped her good friend and three time US Amateur champion, Atlanta's Alexa Stirling.

(Marion was a big woman and if you want to see a still photograph of a golfer, man or woman, really loading up at the top of a backswing absolutely in a perfect text book way, take a look at the still photo of Marion teeing off on the first hole at Pasatiempo on opening day!!).

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Before you respond, do everyone a favor and examine the 1925 and the 1938 photos."

Pat:

I've done that and more, including much later aerials, constantly for about ten years now, and I guarantee you I know the evolution of that course, the details of it, and the reasons why, including the trees, a whole lot better than you do.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss 45 years of playing experience and observations at Pine Valley.

What you seem to forget is that a good deal of the vegatative invasiveness was for NO reason, it was a product of benign neglect.

When a tree that's 30 feet tall, has its trunk only a few feet from a bunker, with its limbs invading the bunker, you can be sure that the trees existance was an accident, not a planned planting, and that its continued presence is an oversight and/or a lack of understanding when it came to understanding architecture and playability.

There's no doubt that the fad of isolation, especially at PV, was aided and abeted by allowing trees, shrubs and underbrush to propagate and proliferate with tacit approval.

The best blueprint for tree removal at this point is to simply get the trees out of the bunkering and its shot lines.

I suggested that, as a starting point, over ten years ago.
But, that should just be the first step.
Great waste areas no longer exist.
Early, and even later photos of the inside right elbow corner of # 1 prove that point.  And, one look at the early photos of # 14 would seem to confirm the point. 

For a number of reasons including some of Crump's original routing lanes (that were never used) there were cleared areas on that course that show up in early aerials that do not need to be recleared now.

Perhaps you should revisit photos of the 2nd and 12th hole before making that statement.  The entire left side of # 12 was a great bunker complex, a complex that was allowed to grow to a wild forest completely obliterating the spectacular bunker complex.

Apparently you don't understand what they were or where they were but I do.

Evidently you could benefit from a refresher course.

And this has nothing whatsoever to do with me defending anyone at Pine Valley, powers there or otherwise. It is simply a thorough analysis of both the creation and evolution of the golf course including the trees beginning from before the course was done, when it was being done and HOW and leading all the way to today which actually includes some tree clearing in the last few years you probably aren't even aware of or where it happened.

I am aware of the limited tree clearing efforts to date.
You can posture and make all the excuses you want. 
The fact remains that the golf course needs more tree/shrub/underbrush clearing.

Your defense is similar to the one offered by the woman, who when caught by her husband, when she was in bed with another man, stated that they had too much to drink, lost their clothes and were just trying to keep warm under the covers.  When the husband says, "that can't be, I saw you having sex", the woman states, "who are you going to believe, me, or your own eyes".  I gotta go with my own eyes.

[JESII]

Pat,

Would you be happy if the trees were all removed to the outer edge of the bunker/waste areas on each hole?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim,

A more prudent approach would be to evaluate the tree clearing needs on a hole by hole determination, don't you agree ?

[JESII]

Perhaps...but can you think of any holes that, once cleared to the outer edges of the bunkers would still seem to need more?

Remember, the bunkers are generally informal and tend to run well wide of the fairway cut lines.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()