[Pete Lavallee]

I tuned in last night to The Pre Game Show on The Golf Channel, as Rees Jones was on for about 5 minutes to discuss the changes he has made to the South Course, but also to see just what changes he had in store for the North Course, which will go under the knife just after the Junior World Championship in 2004.

He was first asked: "Are you proud of what you have done on the South and what can we expect for the North". He replied that: "I am proud of what we've done on the South, obviosly the golfing world thought we did a good job, the US Open is coming here in 2008 and a great Champion, Olazabal, won last year. The North Course  will be changed in 2004 and it will really be a classic golf course, it won't be as long as the South, it will be more of a players course than a championship one".

The next question asked just how much of the US Open Course the players will see this week, and Rees indicated that since it doesn't rain in San Diego in June the course will play differently. He deffered to Tiger who said; with the long Kikuyu rough, tight fairways and fast greens it will be as tough as any US Open Course. He admitted that with the wet conditions this week players will be able to fire at the pin.

Mark Lye then asked: "...with the 7600 and 7400 yard courses being in vouge these days have you been contracted to build any 6900 or 6800 yard courses?". Rees replied: "I think most of our clients want to go over 7000 yards. This course really is long so that it can be adapted. I don't think the PGA Tour will play it at 7500, they will probably throttle it down to 73 or 7200; so its' got all the flexibility. You really shouldn't look at the total length anyway, it's the length of individual holes; if you look at what Davis Love did last week on the 18th at Pebble Beach, a driver, 4 iron, that he just dropped and it stopped, its' not just the ball going off the tee, its' the ball going high and dropping and stopping on the green fast with much less club than they hit in the past".

Next question; "And with that Rees, there's been some talk of the PGA Tour perhaps needing to step in with the USGA and R&A reguarding equipment distances and the like...in your opinion, have we gone too far, and what type of golf course do we need to build in the future." "Well I don't think we've gone to far because we really need to make the game enjoyable for everyday players, it isn't just the ball, it's the conditioning of the athletes, the condition of the golf course, the greens are perfect now. I went over to Taylor Made yesterday and really watched how they create this technology. I learned alot about how the ball is flying, how precise they can be, it isn't just the length of the golf course it's the fact that every bit of the equipement is better".

Very comforting words from the Open Doctor. He admitts that the ball is going too far with both drivers and irons, but thinks the advances in technology are actually helping the average golfer. Of course if you are in the business of lengthening golf courses this must come as good news.

[RJ_Daley]

Pete,  I feel like a lawyer asking the court reporter to read back the testimony of the witness.  Do you use a transcriptionist service?

I saw that interview, and the thing that struck me most is the character of the intended remodel of the north course as one that will be a "players course" and "it will really be a classic golf course".  That said by Rees started bells and whistles to alarm, and air raid sirens to go off.

I have no great bone of contention about the remodel of the south course, and the lengthening and remodelling of greens, surrounds and approaches, with new fairway bunkers and places to make it tough enough to provide a maintenance meld that would be a test in a US Open.  The fact that it has elasticity with up-tees, and normally will have mowing-rough lines and conditions suitable for the public S.D. county and visitor skill levels, is fine with me.  Whether or not the aesthetic look of the remodel of the south is not so hot, is acceptable because the remodel accomplishes the creation of difficulty to acheive their purpose for a tournament course.

BUT, given all the controversy generated by Rees when he starts into this salesmanship about remodeling something into a "real classic", and then putting his own modern design hallmarks into the project regardless of classic ideals, I think he should not be given the job on the north.  As it is, the north is not a top course on any list accept the best of S.D county (and it probably isn't top 5 there).  But, it has a magnificent site-location, and not enough room for a big lot, tournament course.  So why not get someone in to remodel that north course with a TRACK RECORD"  of unquestionable understanding and sensitivity to what features a classic course should present?  I think there are any number of archies that have demonstrated that sensitivity.  From Silva, Doak, Hanse, Forse, and many others too numerous to mention.  

Is Jim Allen now retired?  He was enamoured with Rees's job of the south, and he brought that project in, possibly at the expense of his health.  I thing he did the best thing for the south course.

But, why not have two distinct courses in style and contrast?  Why have the same archie provide the same style and mentality that you know Rees will end up with?  I think interviewing an archie that could give an Australian maintenance meld look and feel to the smaller confines of the north course would be a real home run for the San Diego Parks system.  Diversity rather than consistency  of design styles in that circumstance seems more appealing in my view.

[Matt_Cohn]

I found Rees boring, non-committal, and evasive, and I'm not really excited about him working over Torrey Pines North. I'm sure he's a wonderful guy but I didn't get much from that Golf Channel thing.

[rees]

why don't you guys jst give up trying to bash rees the most succesful archtiect of the last twenty years.  The open hires him becuase he gives them what they want i high quality fair golf course.

you guys should admit your bias, where is pat mucci the arbitor of truth when you need him.

[RJ_Daley]

You know what I dislike about California, and many other sun belt communities; they have all those zero lot line, home construction company projects where every freakin house looks exactly the same.  They may be technically well built houses, but they all look the same.  I don't want that for golf courses too...  What a boring golf world it would be if Rees got to remodel every freakin golf course until the whole damn world looked like a Rees world of containment and pieces and Rees logic if what is golf strategy.  Someone, hand me a revolver.

[Pete Lavallee]

rees;

The point is, the Open is not being played on the North Course.

RJ;

Yes, Jim Allen is still the SD Director of Golf. The party line from the City is that the greens on the North Course are worn out and need to be replaced. The analogy of an old car was used; when they are this old it's very easy for things to break down.  They mentioned in the local paper that all tees, greens and bunkers will be rebuilt, and that the 18th on the North will need to be rerouted to accomadate the planned expansion of the driving range. There has been no public statement as to how this is being financed. Is Rees going to provide the work under the 3.2 mil that financed the South's renovation, or will he be paid a fee this time around, in addition to employing his Construction Co.?

I certainly would have favored a sympathetic restorration of the North, it was the better of the two to preserve, as you say, to provide a contrast to the style of the South. I doubt the City is willing to pay the folks you listed to do the job. I am a bit nervous about Ree's ability to provide us with a "Classic Course". I certainly hope he shares our definition of what makes a classic.

[Mike_Cirba]

RJ;

I hear your very valid concerns, but I'm fearing you've been cooped up in the Wisconsin winter for too long.  

I know...we're expecting another boatload of snow in PA here this coming weekend, but taking yourself out isn't the answer, my friend, even though it appears that every decent course in the US will soon be either an original Rees or Fazio "true restoration".   :-/

[Pete Lavallee]

Dave;

I'm glad at least one GCAer saw Rees say that he saw the ball going to far of both driver and iron at Pebble and witnessed what goes on at the Carlsbad Test Centers and then in the next breath says with conviction "No we haven't gone to far". Can he be naive enough to believe that any of this technology he saw in Carlsbad was going to help the "everyday player".

[Rick Shefchik]

I'm beginning to understand why Rees gets bashed as often on this site as he does. Based on the transcript of the Golf Channel interview, I think he is incredibly obtuse about what's going on in golf today.

Or incredibly cynical and self-interested.

[Jerry Kluger]

There is something inconsistent about noting that Love hit 4 iron on Sunday into 18 and then saying that technology hasn't gone too far, but isn't there something inconsistent about the USGA not reigning in the technology and stretching courses while lowering par from 72 to 70?  I for one think the game is far more enjoyable with today's technology and it is one reason why the game has grown so much in popularity.  Tom Paul brought up our old clubs in another thread and do you think that persimmon woods and blades would make it a better game for most of us.  Rees is right that today's athletes are better and they have better equipment and there is no simple answer to the question.  Course conditioning is the easiest and perhaps one of the most effective tools in dealing with this and is being ignored as a possible solution.  Let them hit it farther but make the fairways firm and the balls bounce into the rough and have them try and hit a really hard green with a 4 iron.  When he was talking about the North I believe he was looking to a course with more shotmaking qualities than distance since stretching is not an option.  I think this is something positive and can be a much more enjoyable experience than playing a 7500 yard course from the tips.  This is perhaps the problem with Bethpage which significantly limits the number of players who have a chance of winning and also limits the number of non-professionals who can enjoy the course.  Let's give Reese a little credit as he wasn't quite as full of himself as some of contemporaries might be.

[Jeff Mingay]

Will there ever again be a human being with a "high profile" who says something truly insightful?

How can someone argue that it's more than advances in playing equipment technology that's allowing (the best) golfers to hit the ball farther, when the example cited is Davis Love III's driver/four-iron to Pebble Beach's 18th?

Davis has notoriously been one of the long hitters on PGA Tour, but I doubt he's routintely hit driver/four-iron to 18 at Pebble Beach in the past. Sure fairways are cut shorter than in days gone by, but Davis is not getting any younger, nor does he look any more fit than he's been in the past.

Amazingly, Rees Jones seems to be one of the "clones" who's fallen for the marketing spin.

Contrary to popular opinion, the new clubs and balls benefit Davis Love III and his contemporaries on the world's professional tournament circuits. Not me and you. We lack the clubhead speed and the skill to make these new balls work the way the pros can make 'em work.  

Pete makes a good point though. Perhaps Rees Jones does understand the modern ball is a problem, but also that if it's allowed to continue to travel farther and farther, there's (potentially) more work in store for his firm. So why not say, "Geez, I think 7,600 yard courses are great for the game," despite the fact that more yards mean more time to play, more land to purchase, more course to construct and maintain, at additional cost that passed along to the average golfer, who's also spending $1,000/driver and $10/ball. Boy, oh boy. It appears 7,600 yard golf courses might not be so good for the game from my angle.

Where are John Low, Alister MacKenzie, and Max Behr when you need 'em most?

[Tony Ristola]

He has bad logic.  Rolling back the ball won't affect any other aspect of technological advances.  Over length Mega Ti heads, graphite, oversize perimeter weighted irons, etc. will still be enjoyed. With multiple tees...the golfer can choose his or her level of challenge.

[Pete Lavallee]

Tony;

Isn't it getting very difficult to design multiple tees today with the huge gap between good and average players? If I hit 3 wood second into a 440 yard hole how far in back of my tee does the tiger tee need to be placed so the we each face the same challange? I'd guess at least 80 yards, is this a practical or walkable option?

[Willie_Dow]

Pete L

Multiple tees are a designable option which I feel Rees handles very well.  He makes them walkable as well with access at various angles from greens departed.  Eg. Haig Point, and his setup of the Open at TCC.

[Willie_Dow]

Not knowing the North and South layouts, but can they be combined as done at TCC, for an Open?

[Pete Lavallee]

Willie;

The first three holes of the North are adjacent to the South, and were part of the original course. They are a short par 5, a short par 4, a short 150 yd par 3 over the canyon. They would severly weaken the layout. The three holes that replace them on the far side of the South 11, 12,& 13 are very strong. The USGA plans to use the holes on the North for the tented village and driving range during the Open.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()