Pinehurst #2

Pinehurst #2

Postby Dukeman » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:11 pm

The last couple of weeks I've been seeing reports (tv/print media) that the the famed "turtleback" greens of Pinehurst #2 were not the original design. The turtleback shape developed over time as they sanded the middle of the greens but neglected the edges due to budget concerns. Eventually the sand accumulated in the middle and created the turtleback.

I have never heard or read that before. Does anyone here know if that's the true story?
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:31 am

Re: Pinehurst #2

Postby norcalvol » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:34 pm

Lots of mystery/myth surrounding this.
Here is a discussion thread (6 pages) showing some of the angles (topdressing being the widely-held view) ... 416.0;wap2

The way the redesign set up the course (no rough, 40-yard fairway widths, fairly playable natural areas for touring pros), if the turtleback shapes of the greens were removed and re-contoured to produce flatter surfaces (as Johnny Miller said on the telecast should be done), then they should not play the US Open there regardless of how historic the course is. The greens were the only thing (sans Kaymer) that made the course difficult.
Accelerate forever!
User avatar
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:01 pm
Location: Bay Area, California

Return to Golf Course Architecture

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest