Pebble Beach Golf Links

[Tom Huckaby]

Paul:

OK, that's cool.  It is certainly different now.  I'm just not one to say different necessarily equals worse.  I don't think you are either... But well...

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom, Besides the back track issue on 6, The old 5th hole was a better golf hole. The old steep lipped front bunker, tested distance accuracy, better than the new hole. A person can NOW miss short, and still have a very reasonable chance for par, if not birdie. On the old hole if a person was long, they were deader than a smelt. Now, even if you are in that back bunker you are only slightly dead. Over that, and you have some real issues, but thats mostly caused by the trees and foilage.

The narrowness of the corridor tested accuracy better, period.


The old green's severe slope tested the awarness and imagination of the golfer. The new putting surface hardly comes close.

For these reasons I LIKED THE OLD HOLE BETTER.

I know alot of people lament the good old days, just because they were the good ol days. I assure the emotion sourrounding my opinion is almost non-existent, and as a matter of fact, if emotion entered into it I subjectively HATE the old hole because of that quad.

Perhaps it's a prime example of counter-intuitiveness.  

[Rick Shefchik]

I'd gladly put up with less than stellar holes for a great routing.

I don't often come across statements on this board that I so completely disagree with, but this is one of them.

I'm certainly not advocating 3/4 mile treks between green and tee, or cartball courses that have no flow whatsoever. But on an otherwise intelligently-routed golf course, I'll take the better hole over the better flow every time.

[PThomas]

I agree with your disagreement, Rick

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom, Besides the back track issue on 6, The old 5th hole was a better golf hole. The old steep lipped front bunker, tested distance accuracy, better than the new hole. A person can NOW miss short, and still have a very reasonable chance for par, if not birdie. On the old hole if a person was long, they were deader than a smelt. Now, even if you are in that back bunker you are only slightly dead. Over that, and you have some real issues, but thats mostly caused by the trees and foilage.

The narrowness of the corridor tested accuracy better, period.


The old green's severe slope tested the awarness and imagination of the golfer. The new putting surface hardly comes close.

For these reasons I LIKED THE OLD HOLE BETTER.

I know alot of people lament the good old days, just because they were the good ol days. I assure the emotion sourrounding my opinion is almost non-existent, and as a matter of fact, if emotion entered into it I subjectively HATE the old hole because of that quad.

Perhaps it's a prime example of counter-intuitiveness.  

Fair enough.  Now why didn't you just say that in the first place?  All this "flow" crap could have been avoided... because you, and Dan, remain off your rockers on that part of this.  Which of course I say with all due respect.

Hell LOTS of people liked the old hole better - in a different mood I might say I did as well - your reasoning and words here are compelling.  Just don't try to tell me the flow worked better before - that is just plain crazy.

TH

[Mike Benham]

Tom, Besides the back track issue on 6, The old 5th hole was a better golf hole. The old steep lipped front bunker, tested distance accuracy, better than the new hole.

The narrowness of the corridor tested accuracy better, period.

The old green's severe slope tested the awarness and imagination of the golfer. The new putting surface hardly comes close.

For these reasons I LIKED THE OLD HOLE BETTER.

I know alot of people lament the good old days, just because they were the good ol days. I assure the emotion sourrounding my opinion is almost non-existent, and as a matter of fact, if emotion entered into it I subjectively HATE the old hole because of that quad.  

I used to have a computer golf game, I believe it was one of the early Links versions, with Pebble on it.  The old 5th was the single most difficult shot on this game.  The uphill nature of the hole, coupled with a default programmed low ball flight required you to use 3 or 4 extra clubs to get to the green.  After that, it was shear luck if the ball would stay on the green.  

Like they say, 3 is a great score on this hole ...

[Tom Huckaby]

Just to clarify, I have no doubt that the old hole was MUCH more difficult.  But rarely is difficulty the determiner of greatness... at least not for me.  

[A_Clay_Man]

Just to clarify, I have no doubt that the old hole was MUCH more difficult.  But rarely is difficulty the determiner of greatness... at least not for me.  

Tom, The old fifth was much more than just difficult. As the computer version must've accurately depicted, club selection on this hole was always very trcky. One of the reasons for that, was that "jarring" turn up the hill, and the uncertainty of how the wind could affect matters. It was incredibly frustrating and compelling for such a short hole. Complimenting the seventh hole, which is th poster child for short frustrating one-shotters.

On the new hole the golfer is much more comfortable, having had the same wind on the previous hole. No spiritual qualities exist other than for some bean counter who has speeded up play by 11.2 seconds by having a more forgiving hole.

[Tom Huckaby]

Adam:

I'd include club selection as part of "difficulty."  But good point re the wind.  Of course this also means 8-9-10 all suck because the wind is the same on each, right?  

As for spiritual qualities, well I'm not buying the bad mojo just yet, though with more stories and more evidence I could be convinced.  I do love the mystical.  But until that time, well... give me the beautiful coast over a blind shot with nondescript trees left and ugly hedges right any day of the week.

In any case, interesting you would say the new 5 is more forgiving... maybe it is, maybe not... do you so soon discount OB left and hazard right?  OK, maybe it's easier to find the green... but it's just about the same in terms of losing one's golf ball.

Sorry man, you're becoming a yoga master the way you are stretching these points.  

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom, 8 does not belong on that list. The out and in aspect to the routing seems unaviodable. Ya know, like TOC.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doesn't anyone here think the trudge up the hill serves as a nice head-clearing opportunity going into one of the great stretches of golf in the world?  

NO, I don't.[/color]

If you're playing great, it's a chance to tell yourself to keep it up.  If you've just played the first 5 holes so bad that you're pissed that you just dropped $400 and your round is ruined, you have a chance to get your head back together.  If there needs to be a walk, perhaps the best place on the golf course for it is after #5.  

Just a thought....

And a bad one at best.[/color]

Dan King,

How would you view the routing at Merion and the compromises made to produce the best golf holes ?

Would you rather that the routing be better but the holes worse as you indicated ?

Adam Clayman,

I liked the old 5th hole.
I saw nothing wrong with it.

What would have been neat would have been to have kept it as an alternate hole for play

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom, 8 does not belong on that list. The out and in aspect to the routing seems unaviodable. Ya know, like TOC.

Correct.  And the new 5 preserves this.

Pat - have you played the new 5?  If so, which do you like better?  Hell I didn't hate the old 5, although I did dislike the feel of it.  It was what it was.  But to me the new 5 is clearly better, as I've tried to explain.  Interested in your take.

TH

[Mike Benham]

What would have been neat would have been to have kept it as an alternate hole for play
[/b]

Looks like the old hole is still there, perhaps playing a little firm and fast.  A nice row of trees looks newly planted ... and a little shack

The old and new 5th at Pebble ... really large photo

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

I haven't played the new 5th.

My comment was that I liked, and found nothing wrong with the old 5th.

I liked the danger that lurked left and right, and it served as a good connector from the 4th green to the 6th tee.

I"m sure the new 6th is a nice hole with great vistas, but, I generally don't like diconnects in routings.

The ones I mentioned at Merion are acceptable to me because of the quality of the holes produced by the disconnect, but, the other holes at Pebble Beach preceeded the new 5th, hence it and it alone created the disconnect.

What has happened to the old hole ?
That was valueable real estate.

[Joel_Stewart]

What has happened to the old hole ?
That was valueable real estate.

It was split into 2 parcels of 1.5 acre each and sold.  One was Charles Schwab who built a spectacular home, some say valued at $20 million.  The other to Don Lucas a big car dealer here in California who also built a home.

[Tom Huckaby]

Pat:

Gotcha.  I don't find any disconnect in routing with the new 5th - in fact I find it an improvement over the old.  But that's been beaten to death.

Re what happened to the old property, it was sold to Charles Schwab and another very wealthy person - Adam likely has all of the details.

TH

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joel & Tom,

I went to Google Earth and got the answer.

The creation of the new 5th appears to have been motivated strictly by money.

Tom Huckaby,

Look carefully at Google Earth and then tell me that it's not a substantive disconnect from # 5 green to # 6 tee.

Before answering, look at where the old 5th led you.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

I'm way ahead of you re Google earth pics.  That is a fun tool.  But I did that yesterday, just as a self-check.

And yes, the old 5 green does connect better to the back tee on 6.

I just don't find it to be a huge disconnect as it is now, and I believe the new 5 is a superior golf hole to such as extent as to render this issue moot, anyway.  Remember that new 5 continues on the path taken by 4, where old 5 moved inland and left this cool coastline unused.  That doesn't/didn't bother you?  Neither did the trek around the guys' house and the hideous views of his awful hedges?  All of these to me trump the connection to 6 tee issue.  But if that's what it's all about, well then there we have it.

But then again, I also don't mind an odd backtrek.

As for motivation to make the change, must we be so cynical that we can't believe it was done to preserve the original intentions of where the course was intended to go?

I guess so.  Only I don't like to think that way.  

TH

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

Once the 6th hole was designed and constructed, any attempt to justify building the new 5th as a preservation of the original intent is pure B.S. and a marketing effort to justify the reasons for the new hole.

I tend to view a golf course in the context of the architecture and playability of the golf course, not in the context of the peripheral views encountered during the walk from the green to the next tee, hence the old view never bothered me.

I wonder if you'd be bothered by the view from the 17th tee at TOC, and the walk to the driving LZ  

That Google Earth sure is neat.

[A_Clay_Man]

It really was a $weet deal.

Schwab and Lucas split the other 4.5m. Build at $500 sq/ft.
The value was at least immediately doubled.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

I'll take your word for it re motivations for building the new #5.  Like I told Adam, I really don't care.

I tend to view a golf course in terms of the playability of it and the emotions it evokes; I leave architecture to those in the business of building courses.  I'm also neither heartless nor blind.  Thus peripheral views do matter to me big time.  Oh, not to the extent of trumping all other issues, but I do play the game with my eyes open and heart exposed.

Thus given the new hole plays better, it has a much better view, and it evokes much more spiritually positive feelings (for me), well I much prefer the new #5.

But to each his own.  

And I absolutely LOVE the view from the tee of THE ROAD HOLE, though I dare say I liked it more when I first played it in 1985 - much of the old sheds were still there, at least in appearance, as I recall.  And no, the walk around an ancient wall didn't bother me a whit.  Methinks that is quite a different thing than ugly hedges.  But again, this is just a matter of perception.  But you did ask!

TH

[Mike Hendren]

Thanks Mike B for that pic.  Whew! That house on the left is uglier than a bowling shoe.

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

Lest you come away with the wrong impression, let me say that I love the golf course at Pebble Beach.  I don't mind the views either.

Had they created a new hole along the Ocean and left the old one, I would have attributed golf as the motivational force, not money.

But, according to you, alls well that ends well.

I wonder, if the new owners hadn't paid a gazillion dollars for the property, if the old hole would have remained.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

Again, to put it politely, I truly don't give a rattlesnake's rump about the motivations.  The golf hole is better now and the course is better as a whole now.  That's truly all I care about.

And I knew you were a Pebble fan.  You are after all sane.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

Are there other holes at PB that could be altered in the interest of financial gain ?