What's missing in this photograph? Why?

[JMorgan]

I never noticed the omission in this photo until this evening while stumbling through old files thinking about a certain very underrated hole on the same course.  Assumed this famous feature was there from the beginning; well, nope; perhaps talked about here before, noise to me if so

when did it appear, and why?

[Kyle Harris]

The bunker that's missing apparently developed on its own.

[JMorgan]

Kyle, how did it develop on its own? 

[JMorgan]

three more sequential pics of same, separated chronologically by 15 years (roughly) ...





Was something wrong with the original design of this hole?  

[TEPaul]

As far as I know no one that we know and none of the material we have really sheds any light on either exactly when or even how  or why the famous DA on PV's 10th came into being. If someone was really interested in that answer the very first order of research would obviously be WHEN it first came into being. I think the only thing extant that could reflect any info on that would be a well documented stagger of photos. I don't think there is anything otherwise on it from the club itself or any other material source.

Originally that hole had sand flashed just about up to the green surface across most of the front of the green and certainly the entire left side. Eventually that had to be grassed down just for stability. We think Flynn did it in the 1919-22 period as he also did with the same problem on the massive sand flashed faces in front of #2 and #18. In that period Flynn was actually at PV for a number of days a week for probably over six months. He was on the payroll and we have some correspondence that mentions that correspondence to him should be mailed to Flynn at Pine Valley.

Of course for the sake of analysis one needs to date photos and their stagger. On that note, I'm quite sure the first one on this thread is the oldest for fairly obvious reasons that are identifiable in the photo. It hangs in one of the rooms of PV but it doesn't have a date on it as the next one on this thread doesn't either. Perhaps someone on here knows the dates but I don't.

[Bill Rocco]

Whats more apparant to me than the bunker on 10, is the trees. Was it Crumps intention to have trees fill in the golf course? I always thought Pine Valley to be densely populated with trees...great pictures!

[TEPaul]

"Whats more apparant to me than the bunker on 10, is the trees. Was it Crumps intention to have trees fill in the golf course? I always thought Pine Valley to be densely populated with trees...great pictures!"


BillR:

That is an enormous question that has been discussed on here for many many years. There are a ton of threads on that with some wonderful discussion and information residing somewhere in the back pages of this uber resource website.

I'll tell you this though on the details of the architectural history of Pine Valley, I have not seen anyone on here who's added anything of real historical significance to the story of the architectural history and evolution of the Valley. Tom MacWood wrote a fine piece on Crump himself, his suicide and his history, but that piece didn't add a thing to the historical evolution of the architecture of the course or club itself.

But we have a new player on the block now who may be about to add some fascinating new info on the history of the purchase and beginnings of the club. It's Rick Sides and some of the stuff he's come up with is potentially very important and perhaps even heretofore unknown (other than to the beginning participants). But like all good stuff on research he's not exactly doing it through the Internet, he's doing it through investigative imagination combined with some real local legwork!

[Ally Mcintosh]

I've never been to Pine Valley, more's the shame.... I've never contributed to a thread on it... I've hardly read them...

but PLEASE tell me NO.10 doesn't look anything remotely like that 2nd picture in current form...

[Jim_Kennedy]

JMorgan,
I've seen that first photo in an article from 1915, sans DA, and I recently saw a 1926 article that had a photo showing that particular feature.

[JMorgan]

This was a spur of the moment thread/query; but while I'm on the topic, I'll mention that this hole appears and plays nothing like one might expect from the photos one sees over the years. It surprises many to find that it plays downhill, which probably accounts for the development of the a**hole (which has become a bit like a tourist attraction), combined with favored (limited?) hole locations. Like the equally famous #5, #10 actually feels less imposingfrom the tee than all of the pictures taken over the years would lead one to believe (the green's the thing), and no doubt less so as the trees filled in.  Another aspect of the course that deserves much more discussion (and will now I hope as Tom alluded to Mr. Sides' participation) is the evolution of different features of the course.  One of my favorites is #8, which had a kidney shaped green before splitting in two, or the run-up to the green on #17 that became a forced carry.  Arguably one of the 3-5 most organic, allometric courses in the world, which perhaps makes it so admired. 

Ally, it looks nothing like the second picture, which was taken in the very early '60s.

[JMorgan]

JMorgan,
I've seen that first photo in an article from 1915, sans DA, and I recently saw a 1926 article that had a photo showing that particular feature.

Interesting.  It looks like it is just developing in the second b&w photo, which dates around that time. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Just developing? I don't see it being developed either in that photo or with anything other than a backhoe. It is clearly a built feature.  That said, I do see the shadow you are referring to, and as TePaul says, the banks were not stable at that slope and with the native sand. More likely was that it collapsed under foot traffic and the formalized it into a bunker.  The only other plausible theory is that someone decided that short par 3 just wasn't tough enough with that little area of safe turf on the front right of the green, hard as that is to imagine. Maybe some guest won the hole with a brilliant chip from there over a big wig member!  (Stranger things have happened!)

About those trees.....the bare shots show just how much earth was moved to build PV. The scale of those fill pads for greens and tees is pretty big for that era.  And look at those artifical mounds on the right side of the green side bunker!

About those trees II - the surrounding property is solid woods (look at the background) and yet the PV course has only scattered trees.  Was it a previously forrested site (perhaps bought for its lack of trees) or did Crump take down nearly all the trees after purchase?  I have an old PV book somewhere, but I guess I have never heard what the original propety looked like and bet someone here has!

Also, while we probably don't know what Crump had in mind, obviously a few generations of PV super and members thought that they could let nature go and the surrounding woods show the results of that over time.  I heard the super once say he spent more time cleaning out and maintaining the wild areas than he did the turf, so at some point, it dawned on them that the native'wild areas did require maintenance to keep the course playable.  If small trees are growing in the bunker waste areas, its probably a matter of manpower to keep them out of there.  It has to be a constant battle.

I would also say those five little conifers left of the left bunker were planted solely to protect the adjacent tee when it proved too close to the green.  Chances of a natural tree forming on those bunker mounds in exactly those locations are pretty remote.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally, it looks nothing like the second picture, which was taken in the very early '60s.

I wouldn't be too keen on all the mini-conifers in picture 3 either... Could the course do with some clearing and roughing up?... Am I allowed to ask that question?

[Patrick_Mucci]

JMorgan,
I've seen that first photo in an article from 1915, sans DA, and I recently saw a 1926 article that had a photo showing that particular feature.

Jim,

I wonder if early alterations to the course were done piecemeal or as part of an overall project.

When you consider the adding of the DA, the removal of the mound in # 18 green and the cutting off of the right side of # 8 green, it seems like a lot of revisions were taking place. 

Finegan's "Pine Valley Golf Club" doesn't delve into the details of the architectural history of the club.

[JMorgan]

Just developing? I don't see it being developed either in that photo or with anything other than a backhoe. It is clearly a built feature.  That said, I do see the shadow you are referring to, and as TePaul says, the banks were not stable at that slope and with the native sand. More likely was that it collapsed under foot traffic and the formalized it into a bunker.  The only other plausible theory is that someone decided that short par 3 just wasn't tough enough with that little area of safe turf on the front right of the green, hard as that is to imagine. Maybe some guest won the hole with a brilliant chip from there over a big wig member!  (Stranger things have happened!)

Jeff, of course it was eventually a built feature, as the whole course is capital 'A' Architecture ... but I would hypothesize underclubbing as one factor that eventually led to the backhoe and the appearance of the feature as an officially defined hazard.   

[Ally Mcintosh]

This hole was a Colt one, wasn't it?... Just something I noticed reading The Links by Hunter recently....

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
I really wouldn't know the schedule of how revisions were done, but a guess would be a bit piecemeal, especially after Crump passed.

Here's an interesting look from an older thread of a 'mash up' by Michael Dugger. Just click the link and wait/watch.
http://greenvillegolfingsociety.com/PineValleyBeforeAfter.htm
...and another that shows the bunker as rather formalized, but no date was given:

..and here's the article from '26 that seems to show the bunker in an evolutionary state, and less formalized than in the above photo. The caption is wrong, says it's the third hole.
http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1926/gi255c.pdf

[Tim Nugent]

As I have posted on other threads RE: PV, I have a book, given to my father by Eb Stienager, long time PV supt in '87 entitled Pine Valley, A Chronical.  Dick, Mike Keiser, and Peter Senott had gone their to talk to Eb about the maint. aspects of PV when they were planning The Dunes Club.

About the trees, on pg 22 it states that a stabilization program was undertaken between '27 &'32 utilizing between 3k-5k seedlings (of which 70% flourished) "this furtehr advanced Crump's desire to keep each fairway a separate entity, lost from view of any other part of the course.  The course is blessed as well with Dogwood, Azaleas, and Mountain Ash."

Jeff B. The book shows many early pictures of the site and it appears not to be entirely wooded but rather like something that was logged a while back and in the process of naturally revegitating.  There's a photo of a hunting Crump from 1909 in an open area with a thin stan of tall pine behind but beyond those, one can see another open area.

About the bunker on 10, dad said Eb told him that it came about because of wear and tear.  Evidently, balls would roll off the green and come to rest in that spot. Due to repeated pitch shot and foot taffic on/off the green, the turf wore out and was hard to re-establish.  Eventually they gave in and allowed it to become a bunker.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim,

Who's the author of the book and what's the date of publication ?

Thanks

[Bill_McBride]

Pat,
I really wouldn't know the schedule of how revisions were done, but a guess would be a bit piecemeal, especially after Crump passed.

Here's an interesting look from an older thread of a 'mash up' by Michael Dugger. Just click the link and wait/watch.
http://greenvillegolfingsociety.com/PineValleyBeforeAfter.htm

Jim, I suspect the attribution above should be to Michael Whitaker, who leads the Greenville Golfing Society in South Carolina. 

But I could be wrong.

[JSlonis]

Ally, it looks nothing like the second picture, which was taken in the very early '60s.

I wouldn't be too keen on all the mini-conifers in picture 3 either... Could the course do with some clearing and roughing up?... Am I allowed to ask that question?

All those trees you see above the left greenside bunker were removed several years ago, as have many other trees around this green.

[Jon Wiggett]

From the before and after photos it looks like the 10th has lost much of its valley between tee and green. I played PV in 94 but don't remember much about the 10th. The course in general looks much better in the photos from back when it was built with less trees and informal bunkering. I must add however that I spent my 36 hole stay there in total awe, what a great course.

[JSlonis]

From the before and after photos it looks like the 10th has lost much of its valley between tee and green. I layed PV in 94 but don't remember much about the 10th. The course in general looks much better in the photos from back when it was built with less trees and informal bunkering. I must add however that I spent my 36 hole stay there in total awe, what a great course.

It really hasn't. The photos in that before and after sequence are from odd angles.  

[Kalen Braley]

This is a really good topic and I think it also goes to drive home Mike Cirba's point from a few years back.  He said PV has lost its wild look and more resembles a Japanese Tea Garden of sorts.

In those old pictures, that hole has a scraggly wild look to it, compared to the more recent ones with all the clean lines, neatly mowed roughs, and finely combed sand.  Maybe with current maintainence practices its tougher to keep that old-timing theme to it, but to my eye the original version looked better.

P.S.  Renting a fleet of chainsaws for the winter crew would certainly seem to be a worthy pursuit as well!!   

[JMorgan]

They had pulled out over 22,000 stumps after the completion of the first eleven holes in June 1914.  After that, they stopped counting.  Then they planted seedlings to isolate the fairways.