Pinehurst #2 - Off The Bucket List

[NJpatbee]

I did not get to watch much of the US Open this weekend, but what I saw from the retro Pinehurst #2, there is one less course that I hope to play someday. Hitting out of waste areas I can take, but the elimination of the rough and the "shaving" of the sides of the greens was a horror story for most of the pros, never mind a bogey golfer like myself.

 

The folks at Pinehurst need to rethink this one and get the course back to playable condition. It is a golf destination course but to many golfers I spoke to, the course set up was a fiasco.

 

The ridiculous green fees at Pebble are not sounding as bad as they used to.

[DZClark]

I would rethink that decision. Having played Pinehurst a couple of years ago, the course is quiet simply amazing.

TV does not do it justice, and just the sense of history and aura from the entire area is amazing.

[Bucken77]

The course would not play the same for you as it did for the pro's. They made the greens faster and shaved the sides. That would not be the case if you got a tee time later on.

[knock it close]

Wait so tight fairway is less playable than 3" bermuda??

[quickstrike10]

This would not be a destination that I would chose to play. Nothing about it from an image standpoint made me want to play the course with the new renovations.

[wrbush31]

On top of what other's have posted, there's a bunch of other courses you can play there if you think this one isn't worth your time! Speaking from experience, I'm no scratch golfer, and the "new" #2 was well worth my time and money.

[Conrad1953]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402940770' post='9507465']
I did not get to watch much of the US Open this weekend, but what I saw from the retro Pinehurst #2, there is one less course that I hope to play someday. Hitting out of waste areas I can take, but the elimination of the rough and the "shaving" of the sides of the greens was a horror story for most of the pros, never mind a bogey golfer like myself.

The folks at Pinehurst need to rethink this one and get the course back to playable condition. It is a golf destination course but to many golfers I spoke to, the course set up was a fiasco.

The ridiculous green fees at Pebble are not sounding as bad as they used to.
[/quote]

I don't think they were planning on having a US Open set up for you
when you got there.

[roll - gybe]

So because you don't want to play it, the greens fees at Pebble are sounding better?

good logic

[Reasonability]

Its your bucket list. Who am I to influence that one for you? My knee-jerk reaction when first reading your post was from someone who lives close by Pinehurst. The community started off as a sleepy little town that grew over one hundred years ago as a resort for Northern visitors. Then came along Donald Ross who left his biggest thumbprint on this earth -- which has been restored to reflect that while reducing water costs. (albeit with much faster greens and stretched out tee boxes for the US Open). To this day that community respects and lives for the visitor and for golfers who have kept it on their bucket list. Then I got to thinking -- its not for everybody. It's not my bucket list, its yours. So to each his own I suppose. That little town and all the tracks at Pinehurst (No 2 included) will be just fine either way.

[Conrad1953]

[quote name='Reasonability' timestamp='1402945066' post='9507959']
Its your bucket list. Who am I to influence that one for you? My knee-jerk reaction when first reading your post was from someone who lives close by Pinehurst. The community started off as a sleepy little town that grew over one hundred years ago as a resort for Northern visitors. Then came along Donald Ross who left his biggest thumbprint on this earth -- which has been restored to reflect that while reducing water costs. (albeit with much faster greens and stretched out tee boxes for the US Open). To this day that community respects and lives for the visitor and for golfers who have kept it on their bucket list. Then I got to thinking -- its not for everybody. It's not my bucket list. So to each his own I suppose. That little town and all the tracks at Pinehurst (No 2 included) will be just fine either way.
[/quote]

I don't even have a bucket list cause I don't have the millions$$
it would take to fulfill it anyway. I had one when I was a young
sod and checked a few boxes, then realized it was a futile pursuit.

Plus my wife would likely give no regard to my "bucket list" of
golf courses if I had one. She could probably come up with some
bucket items of her own and then it could become bucket list "wars".

[JoeyJoeyJoeJoe]

#2 doesn't appeal to me. All I could think of when I saw it on TV was "man that course is ugly".

[AP2 712]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402940770' post='9507465']
I did not get to watch much of the US Open this weekend, but what I saw from the retro Pinehurst #2, there is one less course that I hope to play someday. Hitting out of waste areas I can take, but the elimination of the rough and the "shaving" of the sides of the greens was a horror story for most of the pros, never mind a bogey golfer like myself.

The folks at Pinehurst need to rethink this one and get the course back to playable condition. It is a golf destination course but to many golfers I spoke to, the course set up was a fiasco.

The ridiculous green fees at Pebble are not sounding as bad as they used to.
[/quote]

Having played there in August, I can say this......
BIG MISTAKE

[bruinsPATSirish]

OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?

[caniac6]

I talked to a member at the first Open in 99, and he said the members really did not enjoy playing #2. They said it was very frustrating to hit what they thought were good shots, and watch them roll off the greens.I checked online, and it cost over $400 plus caddie, plus tip. I belong to a nice semi private Arnold Palmer course that cost my son and I $200per month. There is no way I would pay five months worth of dues for my son and I to play one round at Pinehurst.

[2putttom]

I see Bandon dunes in your future

[chrndwg]

I thought the course looked awesome - and if anything it made me want to go there more, because I like playing courses that are different. I liked that if you missed the fairways you didn't know what would happen, but there was the chance to pull off an amazing shot, rather than just wedging out of thick rough. I also like a little brown on the course - depending on the vernacular, I think the natural look is prettier than the painted green where it doesn't fit.

Just interesting how there can be such differing opinions about the same place.

[NJpatbee]

[quote name='roll - gybe' timestamp='1402944300' post='9507875']
So because you don't want to play it, the greens fees at Pebble are sounding better?

good logic
[/quote]

My research shows Pinehurst #2 at $420 and Pebble at $495 - both in the unreasonable range. But comparing what I have seen (I have never played either course) and prior to this weekend hoping to play at least one of these courses someday, If $420 gets you #2, then Pebble at $495 does seem the better buy (IMO).

And of course they would not have the course set up the same way for visiting golfers since that would make for 6 hour rounds. But even with short rough around the greens the balls are still going to roll down the side. If they grow the rough back, I woud not expect 3" Bermuda for average golfers but would be willing to deal with it at 2".

I am sure that the Pinehurst area will survive the criticism that the most recent set up got from some of us, but I would urge that the course owners not go so over the top when it has world-wide exposure. I am just one golfer who will be going elsewhere, but I know for certain that I am not alone in believing that a negative image of the course was projected at the US Open.

[bruinsPATSirish]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949242' post='9508483']
[quote name='roll - gybe' timestamp='1402944300' post='9507875']
So because you don't want to play it, the greens fees at Pebble are sounding better?

good logic
[/quote]

My research shows Pinehurst #2 at $420 and Pebble at $495 - both in the unreasonable range. But comparing what I have seen (I have never played either course) and prior to this weekend hoping to play at least one of these courses someday, If $420 gets you #2, then Pebble at $495 does seem the better buy (IMO).

And of course they would not have the course set up the same way for visiting golfers since that would make for 6 hour rounds. But even with short rough around the greens the balls are still going to roll down the side. If they grow the rough back, I woud not expect 3" Bermuda for average golfers but would be willing to deal with it at 2".

I am sure that the Pinehurst area will survive the criticism that the most recent set up got from some of us, but I would urge that the course owners not go so over the top when it has world-wide exposure. I am just one golfer who will be going elsewhere, but I know for certain that I am not alone in believing that a negative image of the course was projected at the US Open.
[/quote]

If you book a package at Pinehurst with I think 3-4 of the courses you can "upgrade" one of the rounds to #2 for like $100. Pretty good deal that way.

[NJpatbee]

[quote name='bruinsPATSirish' timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.

[jbl]

The banks around #2's greens have always been shaved down like that, nothing new there. And it's a very natural feature.

[jewofgolf]

I think the setup they had is an awesome way to have a course play. It leads to creativity, recovery shots, and above all else, complete ball control to get good results. In my opinion, it was way better than the typical US Open venue where there is no shot at recovery when you miss.

[Loki]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949888' post='9508577']
[quote name='bruinsPATSirish' timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.
[/quote]

Yeah, they don't do stuff like that at Pebble Beach either. (McDowell shot Even to win there in 2010).

[ruascott]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949888' post='9508577']
[quote name='bruinsPATSirish' timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.
[/quote]

The greens have always been like that at #2. Scores were higher back at the previous opens there. Cutting it down to the earth?? I don't even know what that means. You mean tightly mowed areas rather than thick rough?

[mwkbmw]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949888' post='9508577']
[quote name='bruinsPATSirish' timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.
[/quote]
[quote name='eurotrash2' timestamp='1402950272' post='9508633']
The banks around #2's greens have always been shaved down like that, nothing new there. And it's a very natural feature.
[/quote]

If you want "natural", then the grass would not be cut at all.

[North Texas]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949242' post='9508483']
[quote name='roll - gybe' timestamp='1402944300' post='9507875']
So because you don't want to play it, the greens fees at Pebble are sounding better?

good logic
[/quote]

My research shows Pinehurst #2 at $420 and Pebble at $495 - both in the unreasonable range. But comparing what I have seen (I have never played either course) and prior to this weekend hoping to play at least one of these courses someday, If $420 gets you #2, then Pebble at $495 does seem the better buy (IMO).

And of course they would not have the course set up the same way for visiting golfers since that would make for 6 hour rounds. But even with short rough around the greens the balls are still going to roll down the side. If they grow the rough back, I woud not expect 3" Bermuda for average golfers but would be willing to deal with it at 2".

I am sure that the Pinehurst area will survive the criticism that the most recent set up got from some of us, but I would urge that the course owners not go so over the top when it has world-wide exposure. I am just one golfer who will be going elsewhere, but I know for certain that I am not alone in believing that a negative image of the course was projected at the US Open.
[/quote]

Have played Pebble but have not played Pinehurst. Give me a choice of Pebble at $495 or Pinehurst at $420 and I'm taking Pebble every time no ands, ifs, or buts about it.

[bruinsPATSirish]

[quote name='North Texas' timestamp='1402952545' post='9508889']
[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949242' post='9508483']
[quote name='roll - gybe' timestamp='1402944300' post='9507875']
So because you don't want to play it, the greens fees at Pebble are sounding better?

good logic
[/quote]

My research shows Pinehurst #2 at $420 and Pebble at $495 - both in the unreasonable range. But comparing what I have seen (I have never played either course) and prior to this weekend hoping to play at least one of these courses someday, If $420 gets you #2, then Pebble at $495 does seem the better buy (IMO).

And of course they would not have the course set up the same way for visiting golfers since that would make for 6 hour rounds. But even with short rough around the greens the balls are still going to roll down the side. If they grow the rough back, I woud not expect 3" Bermuda for average golfers but would be willing to deal with it at 2".

I am sure that the Pinehurst area will survive the criticism that the most recent set up got from some of us, but I would urge that the course owners not go so over the top when it has world-wide exposure. I am just one golfer who will be going elsewhere, but I know for certain that I am not alone in believing that a negative image of the course was projected at the US Open.
[/quote]

Have played Pebble but have not played Pinehurst. Give me a choice of Pebble at $495 or Pinehurst at $420 and I'm taking Pebble every time no ands, ifs, or buts about it.
[/quote]

If I am choosing one over the other then I would definitely also play Pebble first

[NJpatbee]

[quote name='ruascott' timestamp='1402951887' post='9508815']
[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949888' post='9508577']
[quote name='bruinsPATSirish' timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.
[/quote]

The greens have always been like that at #2. Scores were higher back at the previous opens there. Cutting it down to the earth?? I don't even know what that means. You mean tightly mowed areas rather than thick rough?
[/quote]

The term most people have been using is "shaving" the sides of the greens, which of course they use mowers to do. I have done it in my yard many times by mistake with the blades of mower cutting the grass so short that some of the grass is ripped (showing dirt, or, the "earth") and the rest browns because it burns in the sun because it is too short. I also do not remember the greens being shaved so closely in 2005 and 1999, but I will take others word for it that they have always been like this past weekend for the Opens, and perhaps less severe when us mortals play.

Folks, we all have different likes and dislikes, and what I saw this weekend at Pinehurst #2 I did not like. I felt the same way watching the Open at Shinnecock a few years ago. I saw some of the best players in the world look foolish because of the set up, and if that is the way it has always been, so be it and glad I finally noticed it. I am just one opinion, and the golfers that I spoke with in person during and after the match expressed similar feelings. But so what? It can still be one of your favorites and be on your list of must courses to play.

[AP2 712]

Pinehurst #2 is only part of the allure to Pinehurst. Pinehurst is a special place, once you are there, you will understand.

[smashdn]

That would be a big mistake to take on Pebble over #2.

A golfer best interacts with the architecture of the course (and nature) when the ball rolls along the ground. Target golf is boring and uninspired. I can see where someone who has never seen the course or the sandhill region of NC would find th ecourse visually jarring or even ugly. But the thick bermuda rough was a product of overwatering and forcefully keeping turf alive where it otherwise wouldn't/couldn't. Now they only irrigate the areas key to good golf and give you the width to enjoy it.

Also, this is not a new phenomenon. Tobacco Road, Pine Valley, Dormie Club, Streamsong, and some of the Nebraska Sandhills courses are examples. If you elect not to force anymore on the land than what is necessary for golf (tees, fairways, and greens) and let everything else take care of itself, in the right climate and soil you get these playable waste areas.

Keep in mind there is no such thing as rough in the rules of golf, only "through the green."

[Startzel]

[quote name='NJpatbee' timestamp='1402949888' post='9508577']
[quote name=%26amp%3B%2339%3BbruinsPATSirish%26amp%3B%2339%3B timestamp='1402948416' post='9508355']
OH NO BROWN GRASS!?!?!?!

If the course isn't lime green I refuse to play golf. How can someone break 80 on a course that isn't even green?
[/quote]

I would have no problem playing Saint Andrews or any of the other courses that are not totally green. My complaint is that the ground around the sides of the green was done intentionally by cutting it down to the earth to make it overly difficult - not exactly a natural feature.
[/quote]

Because thick rough is so natural?

Thick rough was a desperate gimmick. It's amazing how many people are acting as though it was God's gift to golf now.