[TEPaul]

"Tom ....what makes you think the new #13 [the old nine in reverse ] would play uphill?"

Paul:

I thought you said the 12th in reverse would play slightly uphill. Frankly I remember it playing pretty much on the flat. I didn't say I thought the 13th in reverse would play uphill. I remember that hole playing slightly uphill so in reverse it'd be slightly down. I don't remember what was around that tee-end.

[paul cowley]

TomP ...you are right,#13 in reverse would play down to the landing area but if the green was placed in the hollow to the left of the current #12 green it would play slightly up.
The falloff behind the existing #12 green is strong, so depending on what height the new tees for #12 in reverse were built, the new hole would play uphill, probably 15' or so.
The drive on #9 in reverse is slightly uphill, the second shot would be decidingly more [not necessarily a bad thing].

[paul cowley]

TomD....its interesting, if I understand you right, that you had to build #11....#10 is a fine hole....if #11 was eliminated and #12 pulled back, would there be anything of interest for a par three between the new gap created between #12 and#13?....something was moving in my head with this relationship but hell, I was just playing......feel free to come play and redesign some of my stuff anytime with just clubs in your hand, no pencils or topos.

[TEPaul]

""Tom ....what makes you think the new #13 [the old nine in reverse ] would play uphill?"

Paul:

It appears I was thinking of the wrong hole. I was thinking of the present 13th in reverse. You were talking about the present 9th in reverse as the new 13th. Why do I think it would play uphill? I don't know, I just thought it felt that way but I think I've only played PB 2-3 times about 15 years ago.

To be honest with you I sort of get #9 and #10 at PB confused with each other. They both are dramatic with the bay on the right but they are pretty similar, at least to me.

No, of course there'd be nothing at all wrong with that hole playing uphill (or even the present 10th as the 12th playing uphill) as the present 11th as the new 11th would be a beautiful hole downhill to a green at the bay.

Frankly, coming from where I do, I don't really think of any of the holes at PB playing all that much up or downhill other than perhaps the 7th. The total elevation change at PB can't be much but that's the least thing to think about on a site like that one.

[TEPaul]

"....if #11 was eliminated and #12 pulled back, would there be anything of interest for a par three between the new gap created between #12 and#13?....

Paul or TomD:

Maybe I can't remember the flow or land that well but how far back were you thinking of pulling #12, Paul? If you pulled it all the way back to be close enough to #10 green is there room to take it as a hole through the gap between #5 green and #6 tee, not to mention finding a good par 3 before #13 tee by pulling #12 green back.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Darren,

A more productive discusion might make Spanish Bay, Bandon Dunes or Pacific Dunes the focus of the exercise because they're far more contemporary.  We can probably obtain access to the details and facts surrounding their creation, design and construction, whereas that information may never be obtained with respect to PB.

But, in the interest of discussion, let the suggestions regarding improving PB come forth.

That's a fair point, Pat, although far fewer people are familiar with SB, BD or PD than they are with Pebble, so again the "common ground" point is missing.

Anyway, here's a question re: Pebble's design - might there in theory be a better way of using the terrain spanning the current 6th, 7th and 8th holes? I'm thinking the 6th could make a dynamite par 4 down to the water's edge at the base of the big hill, and then you could start the next hole from the top of the hill and play to the current 8th green without the awkward blind drive the current 8th hole has, but you'd have to sacrifice the 7th hole to do that and find another par 3 somewhere. Would you be willing to sacrifice one of the world's most photogenic par 3s and a unique dropshot hole to improve the awkward 6th and the awkward drive at the 8th? (Probably not, I guess, but it's a thought...)

Cheers,
Darren

[paul cowley]

TomP and D....my thoughts about routing at PD were not meant as a solution but more of a feeling thing that I am sure Tom D gets at times when playing anothers design efforts.....you just get a sense that something could be different and then you look around while playing, trying to come up with an alternative, which usually disrupts your game and rarely comes up with anything definative....but its hard for an instinctual designer to ignore these feelings when it comes to golf or most anything.
 If one where able to ignore them ....well, that might be the time to pack it in and try to find a more comfortable endeavor like selling wholesale plumbing supplies.....you want how many 3/4 inch 90's? and how many 3/4 to 1 inch adapters? no problem, I'll get them out today.

[Tom_Doak]

Paul:

I did not feel like I could pass up the green site for #11 at Pacific Dunes.  Plus, if I had, I would have had to choose between

a)  walking past that green site and quite a long way to get to #12 tee, or

b)  making #12 a blind tee shot, and then giving up hole #4 because #12 would box it into a corner.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()