Is Oakmont better than Pine Valley?

[mike_malone]

 I played Oakmont for two days with the greens running 14 and the conditions perfect. When I say better than Pine Valley I mean that the maintenance, particularly the lack of trees, perfectly presents the architectural ideals for the course.


 The penal nature of the course is its essence. That it has reached its ideal may make it a better course than Pine Valley which is constantly given a pass for its tree issues.


The ditches and the effective use of fescue well out of play were a more intelligent architectural use of the land than trees.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Except for numbers one, two, five, and fifteen I never felt hemmed in at PV. It has been about five years since I played PV but I understand they have removed some trees. The difference between Oakmont before and after tree removal is dramatic. I have to admit I was not a fan of removing the trees. I was wrong. It is miles better. I love them both just as they are. Can't pick between them in conditioning. 

[John Connolly]

What was/is the soil at PV? With all the sand hazards, it seems like it was/is sandy soil. If so is that typical for that area? Or was it a diamond in the rough?

[mike_malone]

 I have been told that PV was created because it had sandy soil. We have struggled with our clay here in Philly since day one for golf courses.

[cary lichtenstein]

Not even a close 2nd

[Anton]

Conditioning wise Oakmont may have better playing surfaces but I have not played there in many years.  I played the pre tree removal and post.


Last time was in a frigid light rain and the fairways had puddled in many places.  I assume it is due to the rock & clay so versus the sandy pine barrens of S. Jersey, PVGC is better suited for turf growth.  The greens still rolled at Tesla speeds in rainy ole Oakmont though. 

Overall, PVGC is definitely the better course due to it's unsurpassed variety IMO. 

[Mike Sweeney]

I played Oakmont for two days with the greens running 14 and the conditions perfect.

I don't know!


I will check my spam folder. The invitation MUST be in there.

[Mike Sweeney]

Sorry.


I did not mean to be a thread killer. Mayday is the best, seriously.


Based on my personal preferences, I think I would like Oakmont the golf course more because of the open nature which reminds me of CC of Scranton. This is a silly conversation as Pine Valley is in my Top 3, but that is what we do on GCA - silly conversations and needling Flynn loving Philly guys. 

[Chris Mavros]

I don't think trees are used all that exclusively at PV and after playing it a few times, have never felt trees come into play all that often unless you really miss on your tee shot. On this premise alone, I don't think it's better.  In general, PV has more variety.

[James Brown]

Hard to beat the conditioning at Oakmont. 

[mike_malone]

I don't think trees are used all that exclusively at PV and after playing it a few times, have never felt trees come into play all that often unless you really miss on your tee shot. On this premise alone, I don't think it's better.  In general, PV has more variety.

Chris,


The tree impact on play is only one thing. The effect on turf is also important. The next time you go to PVGC bring me along and I'll show you.

[Tim Martin]

I remember hearing the phrase "for inland golf there is Pine Valley and then there is everything else". Would the original poster comment? Thanks.

[Jim Franklin]

Pine Valley can get their greens to Oakmont speed if they wanted. And they can firm it up too. One of my favorite shots I have ever hit there was on #4, from the back tees, I hit driver to top of hill and had 230 left to a back pin. I hit a 5 iron that drew a little and rolled to about a foot. Watching that sucker bounce and roll was pure fun.

PV is better in my eyes.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I just don't understand threads like this.


Are the Stones "better" than Led Zeppelin?
Are boxers "better" than briefs?
Is Yosemite better than Yellowstone?
Is Ireland better than Scotland?

[Eric LeFante]

The look of Oakmont today is certainly much closer to its early days than Pine Valley is. If better means closer to the architects original, then I can see how one can argue for Oakmont.

The early photos of Pine Valley are stunning. I agree that the trees don't affect play too much at Pine Valley but it has completely changed the look of just about every hole.

I haven't played Oakmont; It seems like Pine Valley is more fun to play. As difficult as Pine Valley is, it seems like Oakmont is tougher. At Oakmont it seems like if you miss their 25-30 yard wide fairway, its a 0.5 - 1 stroke penalty. The penalty is probably the same at Pine Valley if you miss a fairway but their fairways aren't as narrow, which I like.

For those that have played both, is Pine Valley more fun to play than Oakmont?

[Jim Franklin]

PV is definitely more fun. Oakmont is fun in a sadistic sort of way.

[Jim_Coleman]

    When I was in law school, my roommate teased me for listening to sports talk radio.  His comment, "Is it really important whether Bill Russell is better than Bobby Orr?"  I now understand.

[MCirba]

Provocative as always, eh Mayday?   

I hope to find out for myself before too long.

[mike_malone]

Provocative as always, eh Mayday?   

I hope to find out for myself before too long.

Mike,


There are only a handful of courses that can be at the top. I offer that the differentiation is how they fulfill their own potential not compared to the other. To say Oakmont is better than Pine Valley is to say it has reached its own perfection while Pine Valley lags its.

[JESII]

I'd argue that "better" is tied to potential...

[mike_malone]

Jim,


This process started when I played Huntingdon Valley last friday. It clearly has reached its perfection better than Rolling Green and I had to admit that right now it is better. I think Rolling Green can exceed it if we maintained it similarly because our green complexes are a tad better.

[JESII]

Well then you should feel RG is a better course but you'd rather play HV...


In the PV vs Oakmont question, I suspect PV is the better course (haven't played OCC) but the fairly unique, extreme, presentation of OCC would definitely gather some votes.

[George Pazin]

Well then you should feel RG is a better course but you'd rather play HV...


In the PV vs Oakmont question, I suspect PV is the better course (haven't played OCC) but the fairly unique, extreme, presentation of OCC would definitely gather some votes.

Nope.


If you don't get Oakmont, you simply don't get golf. Period. I'm willing to fight anyone who disagrees, be prepared, I can bring it...


On a more serious note, both courses are likely more perfect than anyone deserves - conditioning, "shot values", whatever. If you are arguing between the two, you are arguing which Victorias Secret angel is the hottest.


Why are arguing about that? That's just silly.

[Eric LeFante]

Jim,


This process started when I played Huntingdon Valley last friday. It clearly has reached its perfection better than Rolling Green and I had to admit that right now it is better. I think Rolling Green can exceed it if we maintained it similarly because our green complexes are a tad better.

As far as potential is concerned, it seems like Oakmont is presented as well as it possibly can and has reached its potential. I bet Oakmont in the 2025 US Open will look exactly as it did in the 2016 US Open because any major changes going forward would make it worse.


I think most would argue on this site that Pine Valley is not at its potential because there are too many trees. I think the course would be even better than it is today if they tried to replicate the way the course was presented in the 1920s. Holes like 4 and 14 looked dramatically different 90 years ago than they do today. I like the old look. Obviously some like the course with a lot of trees.

[Jim Franklin]

I hate trees, but I love Pine Valley.