Where is the lost 17th fairway at Pine Valley?

[Brian_Gracely]

Looking at Mike's aerial, http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=1981, I'm trying to figure out where the alternate fairway is/was.  I'm sure it's not a simple thing to find with the trees in place, but can someone point me to the approximate area?

[JSlonis]

Brian,

I beleive it was to the right of the current fairway you can see, over the initial waste area up through the trees on the right side.  I'm not sure how large it was however.

Also, there are quite a few trees that have been removed around the entire course since that aerial was taken.

[wsmorrison]

Here is an aerial photo of the 17th taken in 1940.  It looks like the coloration does not match the fairway, perhaps it was turning into a scruffy rough area around this time.  Maybe Tom Paul knows the timeline and Craig Disher can determine the state of the grassed area beyond the right side sandy waste area.



Photo courtesy of CD

[wsmorrison]

What advantage would there have been to be in the right fairway except for a pin position on the far left side of the green?  Maybe I'm not remembering the green slopes correctly.

[Craig Disher]

It's an unusual patch of ground. There is no other area on the course that looks similar. My guess is that it was once fairway but had been abandoned for some time when the aerial was taken. The rough look comes from random plants that have grown over the fairway.

The 1982 PVGC A Chronicle says about the 17th:

"Originally, the fairway beyond the traps invited a long drive to carry the righthand bunker, thus making an easier and more visible second shot from a flat, level lie. The righthand side now is long rough with, of all things, cactus in spots."

The early photos in the book show no trees at all on the right side. The 1940 aerial also shows an open approach from the right.

[wsmorrison]

Craig,

Don't you think the treeline on the right blocks some angles from the right fairway?  I don't know when that treeline was planted or encouraged, but it seems that the right side of the green would require a shot with precise trajectory and distance control.  It just doesn't seem that a level lie would've been a sufficient reason.  Also, doesn't the green slope right to left off the right edge of the green?

[Craig Disher]

In the aerial, the trees on the right look like the block only shots taken from the right side of the right fairway. But when the hole was built, there were no trees there at all.

The book only shows a distant view of the green but it does seem to have a right to left tilt like the rest of ground. Perhaps the members quickly discovered that an approach from the right was no bargain, even if it was closer and from a level lie, and that led to abandoning that part of the fairway. A left-right tilt on the green would have made the right fairway more appealing.

[wsmorrison]

That's seems right to me.  When Tommy wakes up from his nappy I'm sure he'll weigh in.  Thanks, Craig.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Wayne,

The right side of the current fairway enjoys higher elevations and thus better visuals into the bowl like green.

The left side fairway also has a bowled nature to it, which presents awkward lies.  The higher right side and the more level lies that Craig alludes to make the right side a more advantageous side to come in from.

The photo you posted, courtesy of CD, is startling in the sense of the terrible current encroachment of trees to both the left and right sides.

There's no doubt in my mind that the 17lth in 1940 was a far better hole then the 17th today.

In addition, I would suspect that the original 17th green was a brilliant skyline green, and that being on the left made it even more difficult to get a "feel" for the approach shot, against the back drop of blue or grey skys.

One would have to ask, why hasn't this hole been restored as Crump and/or Colt intended it ?

The current 17th is one dimensional.  Hit a drive left, right or center and watch them all end up in approximately the same spot, due to the feeding, bowl like nature of the fairway.

Restoring the fairway to the right and clearing the trees near the green that are intrusive to the lines of play, and behind the green, recreating a skyline green would make this one of the great short holes in golf.  Restoring the fairway to the right would create the decisions, risks and rewards associated with great holes.

Since money can't be the issue, I can't understand why a restoration effort isn't being undertaken ?

Craig Disher,

The green is bowl like in nature and rises substantially from front to back.

Increased green speeds haven't helped this green and have probably restricted cupping areas.

[wsmorrison]

Has the clearing for the new back tee on 18 had any effect on the trees behind the green; is there a bit more of a skyline effect as a result?  I'm going there in a few weeks and will be curious to walk around this hole and study it in detail.  The bowl-like green does slope sharply back to front, and side to side as well, at least that is my recollection.  So I'm pretty sure there are plenty of pin positions that wouldn't work well, especially from the far right side of the obsoleted fairway; trees or no trees.

Pat, I will disagree with one point.  If you hit the ball along the right side of the fairway it does not end up in the same spot as balls hit in the middle and left, namely in that fairway bowl you mentioned.  In my experience it stays pretty much on line and offers a good angle in.  

I agree that the higher ground in the obsoleted fairway would probably give a better view of the green, but I'm not certain that it was the best approach angle, certainly not to right pins.  I'll have to take a look and see how flat that ground is.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Wayne,

The tree clearing for the new back tee on # 18 has had no effect because of the angled nature of that tee.  It is FAR right of the old tee which sat behind the 17th green.

I'll re-disagree with you regarding the contour of the land which constitutes the current 17th fairway.  It has a bowl like, or self corrrecting topography that tends to feed balls toward the middle.

[wsmorrison]

I thought the tee would have to be over to the right a bit--though maybe not as far as you indicated.  The shot plays out of a chute of trees then?  

I think the large trees at the rear right of the green do detract from the approach shot.  However, there's a treeline well behind these that would remove any chance of it being a true skyline effect.  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Wayne,

It's a semi or pseudo shoot, with the trees on the right and the enbankment on the left giving it that effect.

If you go back to early aerials you can see that # 2, # 9 and # 17 were skyline greens.

At # 17, when you're in the fairway you are so far below the green that most trees in the distance are obscured by the uphill nature of the line of observation

[TEPaul]

I've put it on here a few times but here's the story on the old #17 right fairway. The point of the play up there was to get a look at the bottom of the flag on the front of the green. The idea was if you drove it up there you'd probably be playing second and if your opponent was close to a front pin you could see just how close his ball was! Of course back then the front of the green was probably 2-3 feet lower than it is now so visibility on the front of the green was possible then but now it really wouldn't be.

Mayor Ott went down and bought the Dallin aerials of PVGC (the Hagley has 21 PVGC aerials) and we started really analyzing it. We went out there and looked at it. There appears to have been a few little narrow river bunkers way over on the right side next to the steep bank down to the RR tracks and the old right fairway appears to have been a little over 30 yards wide.

The next question became what happened to it. Looking over the progression of aerials over the years it appeared the fairway went out of existence very slowly so we tried to figure out how to get to the bottom of that story. This was maybe three years ago or so and John told me that unbelievably Eb Steineger, the super who arrived at PVGC about 1925 and was the super for about 55 years (all through the John Arthur Brown years) was still alive and well and so John went down and asked Eb about that old fairway and unbelievably Eb said;

"We had to let that old right fairway go slowly because the hose didn't reach it very well!"

Unbelievable but true!

I'd love to see them restore it but to do so they'd have to start near the tee and take a ton of trees out all the way along the right side of the entire hole. They could leave enough up by the new back tee on #18 so that wouldn't be a problem, I think. But the thing about that old fairway's effective function and strategy is you couldn't see the base of the flag on the front of the green today like in the old days unless the front was lowered again and I doubt they want to do that.

The other problem with restoring the alternate is if you look carefully at the old aerial you'll see the right fairway ran out at the same length as the left fairway. With today's length there's no problem at all carrying the big right bunker that made the old right fairway an heroic drive in the old days and in my opinion if they restored it and really wanted to encourage players to use it more they should take fairway on the right about 25 or 30 yards beyond the end of the left fairway, and again I doubt they'd do that but who knows---it would be neat to restore it and it sure would take some divot pressure off of the left fairway (since it's so concave and bowl-shaped) which has been a problem for years.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

TEPaul,

As the year comes to an end, it's nice to see that you finally agree with me regarding tree removal at PV  

With respect to the driving issue you raise concerning the right side carry on # 17, just think # 1 at GCGC, where the identical configuration exists.  In order to get a better angle of attack on the approach shot, a longer riskier carry is required when driving to the right.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Honorable Mayor Ott spent about 20 minutes waiting for me out there--while I looked at the 17th alternate fairway, and I even had images. Unfortunately the disk is damaged and won't open, and frankly if it did, I'm not so sure I would post them either.

Much of the shaping and bunker complexes are still there deep in the trees. Although much of the fairway has been either shaped or eroded away.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

The similarity of the old right fairway on #17 to GCGC's #1 is similar only in that both fairways are on the right of the hole. It certainly is not an identical configuration. From the right fairway of GCGC's #1 you have a clear shot at the green unencumbered by having to cross a greenside bunker, right? The same is certainly not true from the old right fairway on #17 PVGC--you not only have to cross that surrounding bunker but the approach into the green's upslope and left slope from the right is not really as "holding" as from the left fairway. As I said, to make that right side option more appealing to today's golfers if it were restored the fairway area probably should be extended 25-30 yards so the player could simply get closer to the green than from the left fairway.

And, again, you can't believe how much lower the front of the green was back then. There's a very good photo of the way the green used to be in George C. Thomas's "Golf Architecture in America".

[Paul_Turner]

A close up of the skyline green.  Look at the drop in that original green!  It once had a severe tier:  "exceedingly abrupt" according to Alison.

The alternative fairway was planned to be extended 35-40 yards to the right.







Look at the newly planted trees!

[Craig Disher]

Paul,
Super pictures as usual. Do you know the date of the picture from the tee? A cropped version of it is in the 1982 PVGC book along with a picture from the same spot with much more sand in the nearest bunker. That picture's caption is "The same view after cleanup and more sand exposed" which implies that the picture you posted is a very early one.

[Paul_Turner]

Craig

All 3 are from the same set.  A set that has some of its photos (of different holes) published in 1916 in Golf Illustrated.

So yes, very early and before Crump died.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Paul;

Thanks for the great pics.

Could you provide some perspective, however?  Am I correct in assuming that the first two pics are from the abandoned right side of the fairway, and the third pic only shows the left side of the fairway?

Cool stuff

[wsmorrison]

Paul,
Thanks for posting these pictures.  They are terrific.  The skyline effect is excellent.  The picture from the tee shows the hole in a beautiful state and the elevated nature of the alternate right fairway.

Mike,
Looks to me like the first two photos are in the bowl of the left fairway.

If this is on or before 1916 it sure looks like the fairways were in great condition.  In another 2 years there was total agronomic failure and extensive measures were required to get the course in top condition.

[JESII]

Paul

In the first two pictures I see no evidence of the current 17th hole. the third picture ties everything together as it is clearly the tee shot on #17 and you can see the green area characteristics that throw me off in the first two pics.

I too am curious as to the angle the first two pictures are taken from, any thoughts?

In response to some earlier posts about whether or not there is actually any reward for attempting to drive to the right side fairway, I think these pictures make it fairly obvious. If a green has no background, it is increasingly easier to gauge your distance the closer it is to eye-level. This fact combined with a potentially flatter lie and a greatly improved angle to any pin on the left would make the 'risk' of carrying the that bunker system well worth it.

Great pictures, really incredible. Is there any chance the green has been re-contoured in the 80 or 90 years since that photo?

Jim

[Neil Regan]

I think the first picture is the same as the second picture, enlarged and cropped. It was stretched a little wider, though, before being printed.

[wsmorrison]

Nice observation, you're obviously right now that I look at it again.  Either that, Neil, or those people are frozen in place