Are we sure PV is the best?

[Mike Hendren]

One can conclude that PV was not intended to appeal to a broad range of talent.  Also, photographs and the recent aerial on this site gives me the impression that the tees are relatively compact.  I'm curious, is there only one set of tees from which all skill levels play?  If so, I find this appealing notwithstanding my 8.7 GHIN.  In other words, here's the golf course - there's no need the level the playing field with different sets of tees - play the course (handicapped match play) as is.

[TEPaul]

Mike Hendren:

For many, many years (maybe always) Pine Valley only used one set of tee markers at one time! That has changed as of just the last few years. Now most of the time they use two sets of tee markers but that's all.

I always knew that but I never really thought about it in that exact context! I guess the one set of tee marks sure showed what the club has always felt the course was all about. I've heard of great golf courses managing what set of markers players play off of but are there any courses in the world that actually one used only one set of tee markers right up to about 1998 or 1999?

[George Pazin]

I thought Garden City only had one set of tee markers.

[NicP]

All of the "top" Private courses in Australia (definatly Melbourne) only use one set of tees for the day. The groundstaff move them in the mornings a few feet back or forwards from the day before. The tees are small so you would normally be playing within 10 - 15 meteres from the "tips" as you guys would call them.

RM, Metro, Kingston Heath, Victoria etc. all fall in this catergory. I am shocked that this dosen't happen in the States - what about NGLA, Merion, CP etc??

[Sir Peter Allen]

"(Pine Valley) is I believe, the most difficult-and also the greatest course-as opposed to links-in the world".

[Richard_Goodale]

Sir Pete

Could you (or your equerry, or lady-in-waiting, if such is more appropriate) please advise me as to the difference between a "links" and a "course."  I'm having trouble trying to create the proper Venn diagrams in my head.

Yours faithfully and properly submissively

R. Farnsworth Goodale, Esq.

[TEPaul]

Farnsworth:

Simple--anything that is not actually a links is a course! And as to what is actually a links (and what is not--the pretenders!?) probably nobody would know better than R. Farnsworth Goodale VIII, so I'm assuming your question is rhetorical!

[Richard_Goodale]

So a "links" is not a "course?"  I thought that Sir Pete (we called him "Munchkin" at Harrow, BTW) was saying, rather, that PV was OK for a run-of-the-mill golf "course," but could not, of course, be compared to a true golf "links."  Was I wrong?

F VII

PS--like the new Terse Tom style!

[TEPaul]

Farnie:

I took Sir Pete to mean that PV was the absolute tops for a "course". I also thought that he might be implying that a "course", however, can never be considered in the same league as a true links! A links is not a course, a links is a links! A course is one of those things that people started to build inland who did not have the good fortune to have been given actual linksland by God!

Or to put it another way even the best "course" in the world (PV) to Sir Pete could only lick the feet of a links at the very most! You know how the original linksmen felt about it--that even what was considered a great "course" like Suningdale could never really be considered true golf.

I can't imagine why I'm having to explain this to you, Farnie, I thought this concept had been in the Goodale gene pool for about seven generations and that you thought it necessary to marry into the linksland because of it.

[Tom Doak]

Jim Lewis:  Among those "mistakes" in the Confidential Guide, I spent about two paragraphs saying that I thought Pine Valley was great, but that I didn't think it was the IDEAL course in the world because so many people couldn't finish.  I wrote that well before Dr. MacKenzie's remarks on Pine Valley came to light -- though I cannot accuse the Doctor of plagiarizing me!  

Naming the #1 course in the world is surely the most subjective thing one can do, and the most subject to individual experience and bias.

Mark F:  I'm a big believer in playability, too, but not in the same way some other modern architects define it.

[Lou Duran]

Tom D,

Please define playability for us.  Also, want to take a crack at what FLOW means to you?

[Jeff_Lewis]

Just played Pine Valley for the 3rd time.   The first was 20 years ago, the second about 8-9 years ago. Nothing about the course has changed all that much, but my impression sure has.


Perhaps this is the sort of place where your first visit comes as such a shock, that maybe it's difficult to take many of the subtleties in during that first round. Perhaps in my younger days I was too busy worrying about how I was PLAYING Pine Valley to absorb it. Anyway, I am a believer now.


I had always subscribed to the notion that a course whose difficulty excludes the overwhelming majority of golfers from truly being able to play it couldn't be the best.  I am not so sure anymore.


The subtlety of the place, the small elements in the approaches, the playing angles off the tee, the way that the course really does have so much more room than we feel on the tee boxes, the exactly correct scale of the greens - the way the sizes make sense in the context of the likely approach distance, the way most intermediate and long distance questions can have a running or bouncing answer. Is there another course where after almost each hole you can totally make a case that the one you just played could be the best on the course? 

[Mike Sweeney]

After watching the Tonys last night with my wife, I am amazed at the talent and energy of Lin-Manuel Miranda. His ability to teach the history and legacy of Alexander Hamilton through performance rap was/is crazy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNFf7nMIGnE


The legacy of George Crump of Pine Valley deserves that same type of performance for what he created at Pine Valley. There has been incredible discussion of Pine Valley here over the years, and just calling it "the Best" or "#1" rally does not express the uniqueness and magic of the place.


Peter Herreid came as close to a "Hamilton" style performance with his words on "Operation Ferris Wheel" at the bottom of page one of this thread, and I repost it for the new members and reflection point for the old members:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,39817.msg835411.html#msg835411

[Niall C]

Jeff


I've never been there so could you perhaps explain to me the subtlety of Hell's Half Acre 


Niall

[Jeff_Lewis]

Funny, Niall.   I get it.   The forced carries are a bear for many golfers, but most of the challenge is psychological.   The width that awaits once one gets over the carries is generous, and the carries don't require every ounce of one's length to clear.


Mike Sweeney, thanks for posting the Operation Ferris Wheel tale.   Wonderful stuff. 


I am sure many have seen this piece, but on the subject of Hamilton.....


http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/hamilton/

[Niall C]

Jeff


Yes, that was an attempt at humour on my part. On a serious note however I've always imagined PV to consist of largely built up greens with steep drop offs into deep bunkers or simply steep embankment surrounds. As an average golfer who doesn't hit that many greens I rely on my short game quite a lot, and truth be told it's the part of the game I most enjoy. As a consequence, rightly or wrongly, one of the main criteria that I judge a course is by the quality and most importantly variety of green surrounds. For someone like me is there a good variety at PV or is it largely hitting up to a putting surface above my head ?


Niall

[Dan Boerger]

Not every green at PV is a push up with deep drop off surrounds around the entire green:  Approachable from the front or more (or not a push up at all): 1,3,4,5,6,12,13,15 (perhaps),16.


I was fortunate enough to play there twice this past weekend and loads of variety to be had because even the elevated greens have ample areas around them.


The green speeds were as fast as I've ever experienced them ... perhaps a tune up for Oakmont for a few lucky professionals?

[Jeff_Lewis]

Just look at the picture of 1 green in Ran's write-up.   Left/Right/Long are DEAD.  But the front gently works out of the fairway and is very wide.  I found myself always taking the shorter conceivable club into every green, which left with a fair number of long putts or chips, but sure beat the alternative. 

[Joe Bausch]

Just look at the picture of 1 green in Ran's write-up.   Left/Right/Long are DEAD.  But the front gently works out of the fairway and is very wide.  I found myself always taking the shorter conceivable club into every green, which left with a fair number of long putts or chips, but sure beat the alternative.

Hole under construction:

[Jeff_Lewis]

Exactly.   Very cool photo Joe. 

If anybody has a good photo of 13, I would appreciate their posting.  I was just completely smitten with the hole (and I had absolutely no shot after my approach went off to the right into a waste area 5 paces from the green).  The story the hole tells makes sense from the tee to the green, every step of the way.   

[MCirba]

Joe,

That fellow on the left in the picture looks very familiar.

[Tom_Doak]

A couple of comments on this thread from long ago:


1.  MacKenzie was not the only architect to go on record as Pine Valley not being the ideal course.  The foreword to Wethered and Simpson's book has a little snippet about Pine Valley that is anything but complimentary.  Bernard Darwin, too, remarked that he thought "the right of eternal punishment should be reserved for a higher authority."  Note that Pine Valley is hard now, but it was wicked hard by the standards of the 1920's.


2.  GOLF DIGEST does ask its panelists to rate courses in terms of playability, but they do not use playability scores as a factor in their rankings of the 100 Greatest Courses -- they only use it for their rankings of new courses, public courses, and resort courses.  If they did use it as a factor, perhaps Pine Valley would not be #1 ... although, knowing the way GOLF DIGEST panelists vote, they probably find a way to rationalize a 7 or an 8 for it on Playability, too.  [I don't know what their definition of Playability is.]


3.  My own definition of playability is to what extent weaker golfers are able to get around the course.  An old MacKenzie quote used the phrase "irrespective of piling up a big score," and I'm kind of on the same page there ... I don't require the 100-shooter to get around in 90, which would rarely happen even if a course had no hazards, and I don't mind if there are some hazards that are death traps for him or her.  I just don't want to see a lot of forced carries -- especially carries of the length that short hitters have to lay up to the near edge of them, and then still struggle to get over -- or fairways so narrow and rough so severe that recovery shots from bad drives are often played sideways.

[Jeff_Lewis]

Tom,

I hear you on all 3 points.   As I said, that was my view until this visit. 

I unfortunately didn't buy a yardage book, because I would love to see what the forced carry yardages are from the most forward set of tees and what the fairway widths are as well.

My impression was that the intimidation of the lesser golfer here was more in creating a frightening perception vs. actually asking them to do stuff they can't pull off. That distinction is significant to me.

[Carl Nichols]

My impression was that the intimidation of the lesser golfer here was more in creating a frightening perception vs. actually asking them to do stuff they can't pull off. That distinction is significant to me.

That was my view on my one play--but I must admit I don't recall exactly how long all of the forced carriers were, and of course it depends on your view of what "the lesser golfer" can pull off.  Based on my recollection, it seemed to me that from the forward of the two sets of tees, a golfer who can carry the driver 160-180 yards would be able to clear all of the forced carries--and might be able to hit shots high enough for holes like #2.  But perhaps that's too thin a margin for error.

[/size][size=78%]    [/size]

[Tom_Doak]

I unfortunately didn't buy a yardage book, because I would love to see what the forced carry yardages are from the most forward set of tees and what the fairway widths are as well.

My impression was that the intimidation of the lesser golfer here was more in creating a frightening perception vs. actually asking them to do stuff they can't pull off. That distinction is significant to me.

Jeff:


There is this technology called "Google Earth" now, which allows you to measure all those things in a matter of minutes.


You are generally correct that Pine Valley's carries are more intimidating than truly difficult.  If I recall correctly, there is only one carry longer than 150 yards, and most of the fairways are 55-70 yards wide.  What this proves is that anyone over a 12-handicap will struggle with carrying the ball consistently 150+ yards when the pressure is on.  It seems easy at first, until one misses a fairway ... then the grip becomes much tighter and the carries that much more difficult.