A History of Pinehurst #4

[Chris Buie]

From the most desolate landscape you can picture, that Scotsman Ross was able to conjure up an unprecedented golfing dreamworld. There were four sides to this incredible accomplishment.  We have discussed three pieces of the exquisitely rendered quadrilateral many times - but not a great deal of in depth commentary has been written about the final edition.  
And so, just as it is reaching the century mark - and much discussion is going on about the original version of the course whose fairways run side by side with #4 - it may be a good time to have a look at this neglected chapter of the epic.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/buie-chris-a-history-of-pinehurst-4

[Jon Heise]

Awesome job Chris.  With all the history, change, evolution in that little town, it takes a whole lot of effort just to keep track of it all, and I really enjoy reading everything you've put together.  Never played No. 4, but it's always been a bit of a mystery.  Hopefully I'll give it a look in a year or so when I drop down to visit No. 2!

[Jaeger Kovich]

Chris - I enjoyed your writing about the course more than the course itself! Once you play No 2, nothing else on the property even compares!

[Cory Lewis]

Fantastic job Chris!!!  I think the Fazio version is superior to the RTJ altered one.  But those pictures of the Ross original really have me thinking what if.

[Mike Cirba]

Chris,

Terrific work...thanks for sharing here.

[Steve Kline]

Chris that was fantastic. I thought one of the Maples was involved with #4 at one point but I guess not. I preferred the RTJ version and am not really a fan of his work. I think that says more of what I think about the Fazio version, which I find to be terrible. The pot bunkers are awful, the greens and their surrounds overwrought and a terrible homage to #2, and the par 3s are quite repetitive. The sandy areas were a bad attempt at bringing the natural feel back to Pinehurst. The Fazio version was built rig after Pinehurst hosted the Open in 1999 because the course had been used for hospitality and merchandise tents. One can only hope that with the new look at #2 that maybe we could get a new redesign by C&C back to thhe original Ross course.

I totally agree that Pinehurst has lost it's luster with Bandon having 3 and soon to be four top 100 courses. Pinehurst has 1 and none of the others are even close. The one advantage that Pinehurst has is that is easy to drive to by a large percentage of the population. If the courses became as exciting and relevant as this at Bandon I have to think Pinehurst would make an absolute killing.

[Chris Buie]

Thanks guys.  It has been fascinating for me to examine the way some of these courses around here originally played.  I didn't really expect to admire the initial versions of these courses as much as I have come to.  It appears to me that Overhills was a special and superior course, #3 seems a very good course.  I'm not entirely certain how I would rate #4 just yet.  I am certain that in its fully realized Ross form it was well designed - probably very much so.  There is no doubt it would be great to play and was a worthy companion to the other courses at the Resort.  I am certain that if you spent a sunny afternoon on the original course you would come away being very happy with your golfing journey - maybe even something more elevated than that.

[RSLivingston_III]

Chris,
Some years ago, I had the chance to speak with Jack Daray Jr., son of Jack Daray, and he told me his father told him that he was the forrman for the construction of #4. Just wondering if you had run across anything to corroborate that?

[BCrosby]

Chris - Great job. You write:

"What RTJ essentially did was to smooth out the course. It would be an smoother go for “average tourist” and taciturn member. The rough areas off the fairways, the dramatically flashed bunkers, the distinctive wave like ridges of the greens – all watered down. And that did work in regard to appealing to the tourists and members. Those folks did not have an appreciation of “distinctive elements” and adventuresome greens. I think you can say this is reflective of a shift in the predominant tastes of the American culture in that era."

Curiously, at the same time RTJ was also hired to "soften" the Ponte Vedra Beach Club course. The original design was a highly regarded Herb Strong course. My guess is that RTJ did a lot of that kind of work in the 50's.

The ironies are obvious. The "Open Doctor" who set up Golden Age courses to play as 'monsters' for US Opens was the same architect hired to dumb down other Golden Age courses for the tourist trade. The losers in both contexts were some of the best courses in the US. It was indeed a Dark Age.

 

 

[Chris Buie]

Mr. Livingston, I didn't come across that name during the research.  I looked up his name in regard to your question and it appears that this chap was active during the '50's.  So it is quite possible that he was the foreman for the RTJ version of #4.  
I always do wonder what these fellows think before they start mucking about with classic courses. I'm sure they had no bad intent and thought they were doing worthwhile things.  The issue is their perspective - or lack thereof.
Incidentally, the town of Pinehurst was declared a National Historic Landmark by the U.S. Department of the Interior.  It is sort of darkly amusing that they aren't allowed to muck with the buildings but they are at liberty to do that with the courses.  I wonder if something along those lines has ever been considered for a select number of the courses in the country?
In any case, I think Pinehurst has always done what they perceive to be the right thing.  In the current case of #2 they have succeeded spectacularly.
Mr. Crosby that is very perceptive.  I almost referenced his work at Oakland Hills which occurred at about the same time.  His rework of those two Ross courses (#4 and Oakland Hills) was calibrated differently.  He turned OH into what Hogan called "a monster".  I think he did smooth out #4.  He didn't make it all that easier - just took out the distinctive elements like some very strong shaggy bunkers.  The fact that a lot of these elements were essential strategic parts of the holes did not slow down their reconstruction.

[PCCraig]

Great work Chris!

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Great work Chris. GCA need a bit more of this fine work.

[Ran Morrissett]

Look ~60% through Chris's piece at the aerial of the hole with one huge bunker eating toward the centerline from the right and the green up ahead open from the right. From the moment Chris first showed me this photo of the old sixth, the hole's design really reasonated as being simple, straightforward to maintain, yet strategically enduring.

It makes me wonder just how hard/complicated golf course architecture is supposed to be?!

What courses have a few large, well placed hazards that get the job done? Coincidentally, a friend from Denver called this afternoon from LAX, having played Royal Melbourne West yesterday. Certainly, that course is a poster child for such advanced, less is more design. Where else?

I understand Fazio's re-do of the Seaside nine at Sea Island also features mammoth bunkers but I have no idea if they are used to the same strategic effect - any thoughts?

Cheers,

[RSLivingston_III]

Chris,
Not sure if you want to go any further with Daray, but I believe you will find he was a founding member of the ASGCA(?) and is listed as one of the missing members in the first group photo. Most of the work he did was during the teens & twentiess (summer- in the midwest, MI & IL -- winter- in Mississippi & Louisiana), I believe he did the first true island green at a course in the south. Moved to Cali and worked, his son took over the business out there. It is too bad I didn't get documentation from his son... told me all his dads course plans were lost during the train trip to Cali.
I just didn't know if Ross had listed all his foreman somewhere and maybe Tufts had it.

[Chris Buie]

Hi Ralph, I made a cursory check before and the courses I saw that he designed were in the late 50's.  I dug a little deeper this time and found some that he did as early as 1922.  I didn't find any that were in the teens.  He may have been working then.  They may just not be listed. 
They started building #4 in 1910.  Ross and Frank Maples were extraordinarily close. It was a very insular team with the Tufts family, Ross and Maples being the core of the decades long development. It would be more than a little surprising if it was Daray rather than Maples who was the foreman.  However, it is possible.  When I get the chance sometime I'll see if I can find out more information on that.
Thanks for your interesting input.
This was the only reference I found for Mr. Daray:
http://www.worldgolf.com/golf-architects/jack-daray.html

[Mac Plumart]

Great work Chris!  Thanks!!