This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Quote from: Ben Stephens on October 21, 2009, 10:51:23 AMThank god they did not get Rees or Fazio to do No.2 - Ben Crenshaw is one of the greatest putters ever and his understanding of greens/short game areas will be hugely benefical to No.2. I agree and I hope they bring back some of those sandy waste areas to make the course look more natural.Ben,If the "mission statement" is the same, do you think it makes a substantive difference in terms of which "hired gun" will tackle the project ?My guess is that the bunkers will be moved in.If that's the case, will you still deify C&C's work ?Lastly, I don't care if Crenshaw holed every putt he looked at, why on earth would you touch the greens at # 2 ?
Thank god they did not get Rees or Fazio to do No.2 - Ben Crenshaw is one of the greatest putters ever and his understanding of greens/short game areas will be hugely benefical to No.2. I agree and I hope they bring back some of those sandy waste areas to make the course look more natural.
Jimmy,the fact that they hired C &C and not one of the typical "open doctors" is a hopeful sign....How so ?"Open Doctors" come and go.Is C&C just the latest practitioner to hold that title ?If there's a "Mission Statement", and I suspect there is, I doubt C&C will be given editorial license and/or creative freedom.
Patrick,If you can't differentiate between Reese Jones and C & C then what the heck have you been talking about for the past 21184 posts?. If Rees Jones and C&C are given the same marching orders, there won't be much difference in the product they produce, from the players perspecitve.Do you think either would change the architecture and flavor of Pinehurst # 2 ?If so, in what way ?I seriously doubt that C & C would have accepted the gig if all that was involved was a traditional open "toughening up" exercise...Oh really ?What makes you say that ?Do you think that new course development is at an all time high or an all time low ?If it's at the low end of the spectrum, do you believe that firms will accept restoration/renovation/remodeling jobs, just to meet payroll ?Do you think that C&C are being given free reign, creative freedom to design/redesign anything they choose, or, do you think the owners have a specific mission statement that's in harmony with hosting a U.S. Open, like narrowing the fairways and bringing in the bunkers to match ?If that's done, does it matter if you do it or C&C does it in terms of dramatically altering the architectural integrity of the golf course ?Maybe the boys at Pinehurst and the USGA have actually learned something along the way about GCA and other ways of challenging ALL levels of players including the world's best.If you really believe that Ran should revoke your access to this site on the basis of temporary or permanent architectural insanity.Have you ever played Pinehurst before it hosted the U.S. Open ?Were the fairways wide or narrow ?Do you think that narrowing the fairways and bringing in the bunkers to match, ala Oakmont and Baltusrol will fairly challenge ALL LEVELS of players at Pinehurst # 2 ?
This is the best info I have seen on the evolution of the greens, specifically look at the section on Green Evolution 1936-2009:http://www.dunlopwhite.com/www.dunlopwhite.com/Green_Evolution_Report.html
Quote from: Jimmy Muratt on October 22, 2009, 10:29:45 AMThis is the best info I have seen on the evolution of the greens, specifically look at the section on Green Evolution 1936-2009:http://www.dunlopwhite.com/www.dunlopwhite.com/Green_Evolution_Report.htmlWhat a resource Dunlop has put together. I believe Evolution has a place in historical work.Some features definately improve with time.I think this will be fun to watch "from a distance" because the work will come with some hard decisions.This work is far from cut and dry.Ian
We wanted you to be aware that some early stories are being released to the media concerning possible upgrades to Pinehurst No. 2. In early fall, we began conversations with the Ben Crenshaw and Bill Coore team to discuss their design philosophy, and to explore the possibility of returning some historic Ross features to the course. We've done so from long-term, stewardship perspective. We have yet to sign any contracts or review any early plans, and no timetable has been set. If the plan moves forward, it will be at least a year, maybe longer, before work actually begins (ed-emphasis added). We can assure you that No. 2 will remain open throughout next year and during our busiest golf seasons.
In the last minute of the interview posted on the Pinehurst Facebook page, Crenshaw makes an interesting point about restoring approach angles and recovery shots. If approaching from the wrong side of the fairway made it difficult to hold onto the greens @ #2, but it was never anything a pro with a square grooved 60 degree lob wedge couldn't deal with on the next shota. Hopefully by 2014 there would be enough data on the impact on new groove limits on scores in US Opens to allow the USGA to leave fairway widths at the C&C restored margins. Depending on the preparation of the greens, you'd have to assume these shots would be a little harder to pull off even from the short grass, or–if they bring the wire grass/sandy areas closer to the putting surface–really challenging. If the greens themselves are off limits, is it possible C&C would re-contour some of the runoff areas that are out of character or were inartfully scooped out in the 60s? The implication of the Dunlop White material is that work was never something Ross would have done or intended as response to the build up of the greens from top-dressing... Is Pinehurst the only course in the USGA rota at the moment where you could host a F&F Open?