[Mac Plumart]

I saw this on Adam Lawrence's site...

http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/Article/The-AntiAugusta-Syndrome/2078/Default.aspx

Interesting read.  If y'all missed it, it is worth the 2 minutes it takes to get through it.

[Chris Buie]

With the changes in playing equipment the custodians of the classics were certainly put in a difficult position.  The deft handiwork of C/C and their staff will show them that it is possible to have a tour level challenge while retaining the original artistry of the architects - the intended strategic elements - with the aesthetics and distinctive playability of the native environment.
So perhaps in the future people will look back at this restoration and see it as a sea change - a significant turning point.  
Incidently, the term "sea change" originated from a Shakesphere passage called "Full Fathom Five".
Care to read it?

Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes;
Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.

[Mac Plumart]

I never thought of this rennovation in that big of a light, that is why I posted the link to the story.  Interesting times!

[jeffwarne]

I never thought of this rennovation in that big of a light, that is why I posted the link to the story.  Interesting times!

I'll be watching this closely.
Pinehurst has certainly been through a lot of change over my 30-40 year golf lifetime.
I do like the look of the pictures I'm seeing and centerline irrigation determining where fairway ends and sandy soil/rougher turf begins.
Years ago ,when Palmetto (which is located in sand hills similar to Pinehurst) had no irrigation there was a similar effect with sandyish roughs and natural roughness/pinestraw/whatever took root defining the edge of the fairway.
A look that was hard to justify given its proximity to Augusta, common architect, and a desire by many to emulate their popular neighbor. Once the irrigation sytem was installed in the 80's the roughs became more uniform bermuda and some of the texture of the course was lost when the natural scrubby areas grew grass.
 A lot of the texture has been regained with the recent bunker and waste area work of Doak/Hanse/Superintendant Rhett Baker.

I am anxious to see Pinehurst after it's had a chance to settle and am curious what the maintenance labor inputs for the non fairway areas are. (less or more) after a couple years of use. Also curious to see how the wire grass works out.

[Philippe Binette]

As long as people understand that the project is an integration in the surrounding landscape, using what is there, which is the basis of great golf course architecture

Don't try to imitate Pinehurst no 2, the course
Imitate Pinehurst no2, the process

[Patrick_Mucci]

As long as people understand that the project is an integration in the surrounding landscape, using what is there, which is the basis of great golf course architecture

Don't try to imitate Pinehurst no 2, the course
Imitate Pinehurst no2, the process

Philippe,

I think that's great advice.

Unfortunately, through the medium of TV, many will opt for the former.

[JESII]

I agree with Phillipe's call and Pat's concern...after all, the Augusta Syndrome is the example of how people react.

Obviously the work of the C&C team will be highly important, but I would argue that the USGA, and Mike Davis specifically seem to deserve a tremendous amount of credit for partnering in this "sea-change".

[Phil Benedict]

I agree with Phillipe's call and Pat's concern...after all, the Augusta Syndrome is the example of how people react.

Obviously the work of the C&C team will be highly important, but I would argue that the USGA, and Mike Davis specifically seem to deserve a tremendous amount of credit for partnering in this "sea-change".

How much of the impetus came from the USGA?  From a commercial standpoint it doesn't appear that Pinehurst needed to do this.  They were already able to charge $400 per round and the place was pretty much operating at capacity.  Why spend the money restoring and shut down the course unless some influential outsider told them it was a good idea?

[Terry Lavin]

This restoration has Mike Davis' fingerprints all over it.  He surely knew that the waste areas had been grassed over and that the fairway lines had been dramatically altered.  I'm guessing he's quite familiar with the original look and feel of the place.  To me, there's no question that this is quite possibly the most exciting restoration project we've seen in quite awhile.  The only question I have is whether the USGA will try to trick the course up in order to defend par when the Open comes back.

[Jay Cox]

How much of the impetus came from the USGA?  From a commercial standpoint it doesn't appear that Pinehurst needed to do this.  They were already able to charge $400 per round and the place was pretty much operating at capacity.  Why spend the money restoring and shut down the course unless some influential outsider told them it was a good idea?

From a pure business perspective, could Pinehurst simply have realized that it needed to do this to keep its current standing?  No. 2 has started to slip in the ratings, moving from being paired with Pebble well above the field of publicly accessible courses to falling back to a rising pack.  Yes, they can charge $400 and operate at capacity now -- but could they have still done that after 10 or 20 more years of inaction, especially if the course started to fall back a bit in the estimation of the USGA and the PGA too?

Most renovations and restorations are reactive to problems.  Could No. 2 be the foremost example of a proactive restoration?

[JESII]

Jay,

I wonder if most renovations are reactive. Seems to me good business are always looking at improvement and maximizing revenue. I'm certainly not arguing that golf resorts are all "good businesses".

I'd second the notion that Pinehursts move seems proactive...looking at the landscape, as you said, 10 - 20 years out and deciding where it wants to fit.

[Morgan Clawson]

It may very well be the most important.

They will be saving a lot of $ with a smaller irrigation system, less water, less grass seed, and less maintenance.

If golfers and the pros like the new #2 it could pave the way for cost saving changes at other courses. But I doubt NBC will spend much time talking about it.  It's much easier to show a blimp shot of Pinehurst Village over and over and over again.

On another note, these changes are going to make this course really hard for the average golfer! The greens were already incredibly difficult, and now the non fairways will be too.

[George Pazin]

On another note, these changes are going to make this course really hard for the average golfer! The greens were already incredibly difficult, and now the non fairways will be too.

Worse than rough? I'm not so sure. I don't find sand waste to be as difficult as thick rough, but my game is admittedly weird.

Anyone else care to speculate on how these changes will affect the various levels of golfers? Or male pros vs. female?

[Morgan Clawson]

When I played the rough wasn't that thick. But I'm sure it is much worse for tournaments.

[Peter Pallotta]

It's a wonderful thing for Pinehurst.  But I don't think 'the industry' will be following the lead any time soon -- there's not enough money in it for nearly enough people.  Or, to paraphrase: "Scrubby don't surf!!"

P 

[Tony Weiler]

Interesting stuff.  I need to get there. 

[paul cowley]

I have been watching this closely....partly because its a C&C course, but mainly because its the the same way I have been designing the last three course that I have been part of. I have long thought that irrigation was becoming over the top...expensive to build and costly to maintain...two bad things in our current new reality. Letting the irrigation design create your play corridors by controlling the margins by the amount of water the turf needs to survive works and provides a great fairway to rough transition [wide with no first second or cut lines of rough] that is natural because what's outside of the irrigated turf becomes only what mother nature provides for. It can be green in the wet NE [if not in a drought] or transition to sand/rock/ in more arid environments.

Diamante has I think 58 irrigated acres not including the range, and soon to open Black Jack's Crossing some thing like 63....with about 10% of it being rough at both courses.

I feel very good about this approach and will look forward to seeing the finished product at #2.

[Kris Shreiner]

I've seen repeated mention in these posts that Pinehurst has been in basically full tee sheet mode....no way folks. They are recovering slowly, just like most of the rest of the industry, from the plummet. I've been there twice in the last two years and got that direct read from folks that work there; business was off significantly.

The restoration work, as others have cited, looks superb, but tender as one would expect. The wire grass grow-in will be interesting to observe, as it could get down-right nasty to deal with for recovery shots when it reaches maturity.

Still can't understand the back-to-back majors on one track. At that time of year, the men's presentation will no doubt be tempered, unless they really wanted a toasted, burnt out track for the ladies. Having seen or participated in several U.S. Opens close-up, conditions are generally dire for the first few days after the event. They have allowed a small window for recovery, but I don't think I'd want to be a gal competing that following week. I actually asked Mike Davis about the challenges for that scenario and he admitted that they will be considerable. Here's hoping that the weather breaks right and the USGA can pull off two solid events.

[Mac Plumart]

I've seen repeated mention in these posts that Pinehurst has been in basically full tee sheet mode....no way folks

I don't know Kris, when I was making arrangements for my March round at Pinehurst the lady booking us told us to make sure to get back to her quickly as things were selling out fast!  She wouldn't fib, would she? 

[Wade Schueneman]

I hope that they do not allow the wire grss to get so thick (clumpy) that balls tend to get lost in the sandscapes. 

[Anton]

It is certainly being hyped enough on nearly every golf (and non-golf) outlet.  Every website has the Pinehurst No. 2 Ad on its home page.  Very exciting to see how it is received.  I would most like to see the USGA tone down the Open courses and not trick them up.  The past Opens at Pinehurst have yielded some tricks that have been questionable when it comes to shot values and fairness to the players.  Lets see some birdies in an Open for a change.  I trust that C+C's redesign will be fair and fun for the average player.  They have a reputation of creating very fun and thought provoking layouts. 

[Steve Kline]

On another note, these changes are going to make this course really hard for the average golfer! The greens were already incredibly difficult, and now the non fairways will be too.

Worse than rough? I'm not so sure. I don't find sand waste to be as difficult as thick rough, but my game is admittedly weird.

Anyone else care to speculate on how these changes will affect the various levels of golfers? Or male pros vs. female?

These waste areas are very hard, compact sand. They are nothing like a bunker. They will be much, much easier to hit out than the bermuda rough. You don't lose near as much distance out of the sandy area compared to the rough. And a mishit, usually thinned, still goes pretty far out of the sand while at times you just have to hack it out of the rough.

[Joel_Stewart]

Obviously the work of the C&C team will be highly important, but I would argue that the USGA, and Mike Davis specifically seem to deserve a tremendous amount of credit for partnering in this "sea-change".

What's the basis for this?  I doubt the USGA had any input.   Look what happened at Olympic Club which is hoting the US Open next year.  Not only was the USGA not consulted, they were not even notified the course was making changes.

[JESII]

Obviously the work of the C&C team will be highly important, but I would argue that the USGA, and Mike Davis specifically seem to deserve a tremendous amount of credit for partnering in this "sea-change".

What's the basis for this?  I doubt the USGA had any input.   Look what happened at Olympic Club which is hoting the US Open next year.  Not only was the USGA not consulted, they were not even notified the course was making changes.

The basis was my impression that the USGA was consulted on all significant work once a course is selected for the US Open. With what you said there regarding Olympic, I may stand corrected.

Are you able to detail the changes to Olympic?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()