[TEPaul]

SPDB:

The original Crump left green was pretty small and radical. The front right section was sort of like the base of an L and was probably 50-75% the size of the original green. It seems the greenspace on the bottom of the L out to the right went out early and then the green was redesigned to what it is today.

[ian]

SPDB,

THe 8th is hard to see.




Just as a curiosity, in Hunter's Links book the 5th and 10th are clear indicated as Colt on the photos, yet every other Pine Valley hole is indicated as Crump. Is this accuracy, or inaccuracy?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Can't believe I never looked at this thread until now.  Great old pics of #17.  The one from the tee is the best, showing the difference in height (and blindness) it took to reach the right fairway for a better view into the then-almost-100%-island green in the sand.  Today, trees encroach much closer on the right side.

[TEPaul]

Ian:

To answer your last question, it's my sense that no one should probably put all that much stock in the attribution in those captions under those photographs as to actually who did what on various holes between Crump and Colt. I think we've developed a whole slew of research recently into who did what and when that can probably be a whole lot more indicative and accurate than those captions.

[Paul_Turner]

I got the above pic from a magazine.  I think it must be when they decided to add the left hand side green on the 9th hole.  I don't have the date to hand, but from memory, I think it was relatively late...later than 1925.  It does suggest that the Maxwell green was originally going to replace the Alison one.  

The scan is a bit crappy, but you can just make out the flagstaff on the centre/left.

[TEPaul]

Paul:

If that magazine report implies that the right green (Alison) was going to be obsoleted to redesign the left green (Crump's original) by Maxwell, I think that report is pretty inaccurate. I doubt the club ever considered obsoleting the right green. What the club did consider though was simply redesigning the left green during the work of the 1921 Advisory Committee. However, Alison recommended it would be cheaper to retain the left green and simply build another one to its right. This, he explained, would have the benefit of keeping the left green in play while the right green grew in. If Alison recommended that after the right green came into play the left green be obsoleted he certainly didn't say that in his recommendation. And, so, consequently the evolution was that Maxwell just finally redesigned the left green to what it is today. The right green must have been built very early in the work of the 1921 Advisory Committee because in the "remembrances" that were used during that committee work Carr mentions that was something Crump certainly never foresaw.

Both Carr and Smith are almost identical about what Crump planned to do on the 9th hole and with the 9th green. He wanted to direct the fairway to the right of the way it is now and turn it into a dogleg left with a green that had a "bottle neck" effect bunker scheme in the front, somewhat reduced tiers from the way it originally was and narrow bunkers behind to catch balls from running over the green and down the hill. Maxwell's green does have many of those features Carr and Smith explained that Crump wanted to do.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Paul Turner & TEPaul,

That photo gives one the impression that the 9th fairway rises substantially from the location of the photo, through the fairway to the green.

Do you think that the fairway was once lower then it's present elevation ?

How do you account for the noticeable rise as you look toward the green ?

[ian]

Tom,

Are the notes from the advisory committee available in any of the Pine Valley history books. Or are these found elsewhere?

We once had the old history book, but it "got legs".

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I read with interest, Simon Carr's account of Pine Valley.

Of particular interest was the irrigation system.

Carr indicates that a "complete" system was installed and that it consisted of a two (2) inch main laid over the whole course.

It would seem to make sense that this main would be extended to include the right side fairway on # 17.

Hence, I find the story as to the demise of the right side fairway on # 17, due to hose restrictions, to be in conflict with Carr's account.

I would suggest the following for your upcoming visit.

Rent the best Magnometers and Metal detectors you can and search for the main in that segment of the property that represents the abandoned 17th fairway.

If Carr is accurate in his description, it would seem that the main would remain intact today, below the ground.
It's unlikely that the main was dug up when the fairway was abandoned, hence, you may be able to locate them.

If they exist, I would imagine that the main would run the centerline of the right side fairway.  Perhaps the photos and aerials can help you narrow your field of search.

I would suggest that you take colored marking flags with you, such that you can plot the main line on the surface, and from there, the margins of the fairway.

I hope you strike iron.

Good luck

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
I read with interest, Simon Carr's account of Pine Valley."

Did you now?

"Of particular interest was the irrigation system."

Ummmmm, is that right?

You said;

"Carr indicates that a "complete" system was installed and that it consisted of a two (2) inch main laid over the whole course."

When did Carr indicate that?

You said:

"It would seem to make sense that this main would be extended to include the right side fairway on # 17."

When did the right fairway get built?

You said:

"Hence, I find the story as to the demise of the right side fairway on # 17, due to hose restrictions, to be in conflict with Carr's account."

If an irrigation extension was not constructed for the right fairway it would not be in conflict with Carr's account if Carr wrote that account before the right fairway was constructed.

Seeing as how one can see that the right fairway appears to have gone out of play very slowly (this can be ascertained by comparing aerials of differing years) and seeing as how the superintendent of PVGC mentioned that the hose didn't reach very well I think I might tend to go with what the superintendent of PVGC at that time said, unless you think it's more logical to make up some story such as John Y Brown just didn't like the right fairway.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Fairways don't go out of play very slowly.

A failure to maintain them would put them out of play within a month, two at the most.

Other then a few dollars, what do you have to lose by looking for the main ?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
Fairways don't go out of play very slowly.
A failure to maintain them would put them out of play within a month, two at the most."

Pat:

Not really. Check out a progression of aerials yourself then. It really does look like the right went out slowly probably from a lack of water although they very well may've continued to mow it. On the later aerials it does look sort of like low sparse rough.

"Other then a few dollars, what do you have to lose by looking for the main?"

I guess that's a question you'd have to ask one of the members of the 1921 Advisory Committee if you can find one of them. The interesting thing about the right 17th is it appears to have been the only fairway area added after Crump, so maybe they just overlooked extending the main to it. Stuff happens Pat!

What would you think about them extending it up there today and restoring that fairway?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I think it would be a great idea.

It would insert additional strategy into the hole, as it was intended some 83 years ago.

Since 1921/22 was after the war and before the Great Depression, that line just might be there.
It's worth a look/try.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()