SF Bay Area GCAers to "Play Callippe" Saturday morning, March 4!

[Matt_Cohn]

David said it best on the course - it is exactly what it aspires to be. It's pleasant, nice, fun, pretty, and people aren't going to lose too many golf balls, especially on the front nine.

I was interested in the compromises the architect had to make given the obstacles in the routing. And there were a lot of obstacles!:

-Lots of environmentally sensitive areas
-Steep hills on the back nine
-A couple of roads
-Four houses spread around the couple hundred acres
-Residential development yet to be done

I thought the ESA's were frustrating on a couple of holes - 10, 15, and 18 especially - but really the architect did pretty well to minimize major disruptions to the routing.

A couple of people noted that the greens were repetitive - the first part of the green would slope towards the fairway, then there would be a ridge, then the back part of the green would slope more sideways or away. It's good design but it seemed to happen on every hole!

Number 18 is worth talking about. It's 580 from the tips, par 5. An ESA cuts across the fairway at about 280. Then it crosses further up the hole near the green. The fairway in the lay-up area is so narrow that laying up inside of 150 is a huge risk. The result? 3 wood, 6 iron, 6 iron?

Or, a driver over everything into the 10th fairway, then basically the same thing. It wasn't designed that way, but it was actually nice to have that option!

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt:

I was curious about #18 as well.  Now I played it from the whites with hickories, but the effect ended up just about what you said (brassie, mid-iron, jigger for me).  I too did not want to go past the left fairway bunker up by the green - thus inside 150 - because you're just asking for the ball to roll down into the creek.  The funny thing was, with hickories it was very fun - hell I wasn't gonna get it much past the 150 anyway.

What I was wondering though was the area on the far RIGHT of the fairway off the tee.  I hit it down the middle and sure, one can run out there - I'd guess it's about 220 to the creek there, from the whites - so 250 from the tips?  But there was a LOT more room on the right side - the creek went out on an angle - I'm just guessing that on the right side, you have 300+ yards from the tips.  You can't really see that right side and how far it extends from the tee...

So is there a viable play for the big hitter to go way up the right side, and even try to get there in two?

It would take two great shots... are the trees in the way?

Interesting hole in any case.

As for the course as a whole, you guys summed it up well.  It's gonna fill a need for East Bay golfers, for sure.  I doubt it will end up as any great destination golf course, but I know I'll go back.

TH

[ed_getka]

I think the main problem with #18 is the fairway off the tee slopes down to the left to the ESA and creek. I think from the end of the fairway you would have to carve a pretty good slice to get to the green in two, and the odds wouldn't be very good at all.  From the tips you can drive 331 yards to the end of the fairway, which leaves 238 yards to the hole (as a crow flies I presume, since the hole is 573 yds from the tips).
    The second shot problem for those not going for it is that the next island of fairway is tilting pretty good to the right. The main problem with these tilts is not the water hazard, but the ESA area that starts well before you get to the water usually.

[Tom Huckaby]

Ed - thanks for those distances - I thought there must be a LOT of room going down the right side.  And yes it slopes, but I didn't notice it being THAT much... I do think one could bomb one up that side and at least consider getting it there in two.  If one can hit the ball 300+, 238 yards is a middle iron.

Anyway the only reason I bring this up is to show that it's not completely a forced three-shot hole.  Sure, the percentage of golfers who can get to this in two is minuscule, but the option does exist.

And then consider this:  we're always clamoring for par fives that can't be reached where there is "interest" in the 2nd shot.  Doesn't this hole have this in spades?

The more I consider this hole, the more I like it.  It's got a great green also - tiny shelf back left would be one hell of a "sunday" pin placement.

TH

[ed_getka]

I will have to reserve final judgement on #18 for when I finally hit some quality shots there, but it is certainly demanding, which is what an 18th hole should be.
   The nice thing about Callippe is that I played it expecting never to go back, and I actually wouldn't mind playing it again due to the value I get as a resident and the course being 1 mile from my home.
    The other thing in terms of demands is that many greens seemed to have some pin positions that will give tournament golfers all they can handle.

[Matt_Cohn]

I thought my best chance to reach the green was to hit driver left over by the cart paths, to the left of the creek! I don't think it would be possible, from what I saw, to hit a blind cut three wood over a hill and tall trees from the right side of the fairway. It's so hard to hit the teeshot over there anyway. I'd rather aim waaaay left and hit it hard.

Besides, as I found out, if I miss my teeshot 50 yards left, I can still play the hole. But if I aim driver down the fairway and mis-hit the shot at all, I'm in big trouble!

By the way, is it really 330 to the end of the fairway? It sure didn't seem like it!

[ed_getka]

Matt,
   Good point about the yardage to the end of the fwy. There were a few places on the course where yardages were suspect, but the ones I listed are from the yardage book.
    Hitting it left like you say is certainly an option, one I didn't think about since I can't manage it. Although the yardage book makes the carry left out to be as long as the end of the fairway to the right, which I am pretty sure isn't how it really is.

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt/Ed:  my next question was going to be how far it was to clear the hazard and reach the 2nd part of the fairway on the left - good call Matt!  Seems like the big bomber could reach in two via that route, and it would be more viable than the huge cut required to take the right route.  I wasn't sure how far the trees came out on the right and the amount of cut required there.

BTW I'd believe it's 331 to the edge going right.  Tips were way behind where I played from... but man I saw a LOT of room on that side.

In any case, the point is there is a lot going on on this golf hole.  I do like it.

TH

[David_Tepper]

Matt, Ed & Tom -

On #18, I hit my usual, pokey 205yd. drive (from the blue tees) pretty much down the center of the fairway. I was surprised at how close I was to the hazard, both on my left (no more the 5 yards away) and directly ahead of me (no more than 10 yards).

If I had hit my tee shot 10-15 yards further right, the fairway extends for another 20-25 yards before reaching the hazard. But  that is a narrow area, that gets narrower the further out you go. Even a perfect drive to that area would require a rather spectacular, Tiger-like high fade around the trees to reach the green in two, a shot with which I am clearly NOT familiar.

DT        

[Tom Huckaby]

David - yeah, I guess it is silly to imagine reaching in two down that right side for us mortals.  But I do think there are those that can do it... and more importantly, it gives one and all a place to hit the ball if they simply must hit driver on the golf hole.  Most people hate a three shot hole with a forced layup off the tee - this right side gives the option to bang away.

Interesting I am picturing the distances a bit differently though, more in line with the yardage guide... I hit a relatively poor drive with the hickory brassie from the whites that ended up perfect, right in the middle, 10 yards short of the creek.  Figure that went 200 yards.  Man I thought there was at least another 75-100 yards on the right side past where I ended up.  Maybe it's my mind playing tricks.  But that is consistent with the yardage guide apparently.

Separate topic:  what did I miss on holes 11-17?  Ed described a cool drop shot #13 - anything else of note on those holes?

TH

[David_Tepper]

Tom -

#11 is a straight ahead, very uphill par-4 with blind shot into the sloped green. You do no want to be above the hole! Nice view of the valley from the green.

#12 is a short, downhill par-4 with hazard stakes along the whole right side of the hole and cutting into the fairway about 210 yards from the tee. I laid up short with a 5-wood from the blues and Matt laid up with a 4-iron from the blacks. Tim and Pat both carried the hazard with driver from the blues.

#13, as Ed described, is a drop-shot par-3. It has VERY wide tee-boxes, which should offer some interesting angles into the green as the tee-markes are moved around over time.

#14 is a short, up-hill par-4 with an arroyo down the entire left side of the hole. The green has a nice false front.

#15 is a short, down-hill, dog-leg right par-5, with a pond short & left of the green. I found the hole a bit awkward, even though I was never in the fairway and still made an easy 5.

#16 is a long par-3 with lateral stakes all the way down the right side. There are also stakes behind the green and to the left of it. The green is fairly flat. My guess is anyone getting aggressive with a back pin position is asking for trouble and is bringing all 3 hazard areas into play. Seems to me the smart play is playing to the front of the green and taking your 2-putt (or chip and putt) par.

#17 is a long par-4, probably the toughest one on the course. The hazard runs all the way down the right side of the hole and factors into both the 1st and 2nd shot.

Adding in #18, I think the finishing 3 holes are by far the toughest stretch on the course.

DT          

[Tom Huckaby]

David:

Many thanks!  Yes, I can see that the finishing stretch would be the toughest part.  And all of those holes sound pretty darn good to me....

Just more reason for me to get back there.

 

[Tim Leahy]

David - yeah, I guess it is silly to imagine reaching in two down that right side for us mortals.  But I do think there are those that can do it... and more importantly, it gives one and all a place to hit the ball if they simply must hit driver on the golf hole.  Most people hate a three shot hole with a forced layup off the tee - this right side gives the option to bang away. Interesting I am picturing the distances a bit differently though, more in line with the yardage guide... I hit a relatively poor drive with the hickory brassie from the whites that ended up perfect, right in the middle, 10 yards short of the creek.  Figure that went 200 yards.  Man I thought there was at least another 75-100 yards on the right side past where I ended up.  Maybe it's my mind playing tricks.  But that is consistent with the yardage guide apparently.Separate topic:  what did I miss on holes 11-17?  Ed described a cool drop shot #13 - anything else of note on those holes?TH/quote]

I am pretty sure that the fairway on 18 slopes too severely to the left to play down the right long. I hit my best drive of the day from the blues right center, maybe 260, and watched it kick left into the creek. Dropped and hit a crisp 3 iron into the second ditch. Not my favorite hole. But I do think that Matt could have gotten to the second fairway over the creek with his drive from the blacks. He easily cleared the tree on the left and it was the safe play into the 10th fairway, bad design? I liked the 15th, since it was reachable with a good shot but had plenty of hazards and options. I want to play it again and would definitely play it over Poppy Ridge, although not as good as Wente. How about our next Nocal GCA at Wente? Wine and golf.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim - well, I guess I am kind of a masochist.  Now I wouldn't want EVERY hole to be so fraught with hazards as 18 is, but to me it just sorta worked... And there was just so much room going down the right side, well... that intrigued me.  But I'm getting the feeling that not only is it not realistic to get to, it's not wise to even try.  So we have the option of going over the creek on the left for the big bombers...

In any case, Wente sounds good to me.  Kind of expensive, but I do need to get back there also.

TH

[Matt_Cohn]

Here's an attempt at drawing the hole so the rest of GCA can play along with us as we discuss! The hole is 580 from the tips and gets shorter in 20-25 yard increments from forward tees. The green is 47 yards deep. Everything slopes gently towards the creek, which is atually quite small, but I drew it larger for clarity. Yardages are from the tips and the 150 is to the middle of the green. The blob at 250 is a tree.

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt - that's a pretty damn good drawing!

I don't remember going over the gunch on the tee shot though, and I recall the tee shot angle as quite different - are the forward tees on the other side?

I guess the only other thing to keep in mind is that the green is quite raised.

But that's the golf hole!

And you're right - playing out into 10 is a very viable option.  

[Matt_Cohn]

Yeah, huh, because that whole area cuts across #10. The drawing has been modified!

[Tom Huckaby]

Gotcha!

Yes, you cross over it from 10 green to 11 tee.  I was playing whites though, so wasn't sure if the black tee was on that side - sure wouldn't have surprised me!

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

A very fun match was held at Callippe yesterday, with Tom Huckaby and Steve "Mr. Clutch" Pieracci dueling Mike Benham and Paul Thomas to a hard-fought draw.  A great time was had by all.

I post because I'm interested in the impressions of these other three on the course...

My take is this:  having only played 1-10 and 18 at our earlier outing, I missed the best holes on the course.  It does get quite interesting starting on 11.  Really every hole from that point forward has something going for it... and the finish is TOUGH.  15 is a potential birdie hole, but 16-17-18 are all long tough holes, and interesting because it goes par 3, 4, 5 in succession.

As for 18, having played it now twice, I really do like it.  Others won't... because it really is damn near impossible to get closer than 120 yards for your 3rd shot.  But to get to 150 even requires two very thoughtful, very well-executed shots... and aren't we always clamoring for par fives that require such?  It's a very tough golf hole... and a great one by me.

The course as a whole surely isn't the 6th best public in our state, but I have to believe that's an anomaly by GW caused by too few votes being cast.  It will settle likely in the 20-25 range next year, I'd say.  On the whole it is a very fun golf course, reasonably priced, and as such a great addition to the Bay Area landscape.  #6 is just VERY high praise, too high in this case.

TH

[Mike Benham]

-Lots of environmentally sensitive areas
-Steep hills on the back nine
-A couple of roads
-Four houses spread around the couple hundred acres
-Residential development yet to be done

Having had the thrill of being part of Huckaby's entourage to Callippe Preserve, I want to echo some of Matt's comments ...

-  No straight holes, other than the straight uphill #11 …

-  3 out of the 4 par-5s are uphill …

-  2 out of the 4 par-3s are drop shots …

-  As noted by Ed Getka, the shortish par-4s lack appropriate options for risk-reward play.  The 322 yard 12th suffers greatly as it has a huge ESA to the right of the fairway 220 yards from the tee.  I believe all of the short par-4s will play into the prevailing wind, further reducing the options.

-  There are not many flat putts on these greens with many having severe slope to the point where there may be many unpinnable locations if the green speeds increase (#15 is an example).  

-  Yes, many of the greens have back to front slope for the first half with a ridge and slope falling off the back, but that’s OK, it is not that common of a design feature in NorCal.

-  The definition of an ESA needs to be changed … a creek in horse/cattle country is a creek.  The ESAs at Callippe have more marking flags and newly planted plant material that prove that they aren’t existing naturally in nature but are being manufactured.

-  The clubhouse is at the top of the property (requiring #9 and #18 to finish uphill, while #1 and #10 are moderately downhill), perhaps compromising some of the potential of the property.  Couple that with two parcels of private property that the course is routed around or through I wonder how the design/routing would have been different if they were able to acquire those parcels of land and have the clubhouse in a different location.

-  There are many good holes, and hitting driver off the tee may not be the best option depending on the wind conditions and tee box location.  #9, #17 come to mind that on days when the wind is behind you, even from the back tees, a driver would be too much club.

-  Shamed my playing partners into playing from the back tee boxes, it wasn’t so bad was it?

[Tom Huckaby]

Great comments Mike - very astute.

And yeah, you were right, the tips worked out just fine.  It's difficult from those tees, but far from impossible.  And using the modern cannons you also shamed me into using, such tees did provide for the most choices on damn near every hole.

We were lucky (score-wise) but unlucky (interest-wise) to play it sans wind - great call re how that would play out.

I guess the only bone to pick I have is re #12 - you and I both proved that a driver there is a very viable option.  It's not THAT narrow up by the ESA... and successfully negotiating that shot did give some reward - the pitch in from that angle is pretty darn easy. I know, having hit both my ball and your funsy tee-shot from there.  Of course into the wind that all falls away - layup becomes the one and only play - but sans wind, it was pretty darn interesting.  Imagine in an "opposite" wind if that is helping... or if you play up a set of tees... The risk-reward then becomes very real.

TH

[Steve Pieracci]

A fun time indeed.  The clutch worked when it had too..it was slipping the previous three holes.  

The course was fun, set up nicely for the conditions, and I will be interested in going back in the summer when the wind kicks up and thngs dry out.  Faster greens with those pins we saw yesterday will make it very tough if not impossible.  

I have to disagree with you on #18.  I like the option of going for it in two if 18 is a 3 shotter.  How much more interesting would our match been if that were possible yeterday.  We would most likely have opted for one safe play and one going for it.  Especially in a match like yesterday.  I like the hole, just not as #18.  

#11 straight up the hill was bit much.  I would like to know the elevaton change.  

The front side a fair collection of short par 4's.    

All in all, a reasonable test with a good amount of thinking to be done to get you through it.  

 

 

[Tom Huckaby]

Steve, it just took the pressure-level to be raised to the enormity it was on 18 for you to get going.

 

Re 18, well... I'm not saying I'd want EVERY hole to be like this, but think of it as a change of pace... We play SO many par fives where reaching in two is an option, if not downright expected... It's cool to me to have one where that's impossible, and where the 2nd shot is so damn hard just to get into position to reach on the third.  For these reasons I think 18 is really unique, and really cool.

Thinking about this more.... #9 is kinda this way also.  I can't see a day where that's reachable in two... sorta the same reason.  So there goes my uniqueness theory - two holes on the same course with sorta the same thing going on!

I still like both holes though.  The other par fives balance out - 3 is long but reaching it wouldn't be out of the question, move up a tee or get some wind help... 15 is very very reachable, nice risk-reward.

In any case, hell yes, we need to go back in the summer to sort this all out.  In fact I think we need to set up a series of matches, you and me v. Benham and visitor to be named later.

 

[Steve Pieracci]

Sorry for got one thing:

Maybe....................




Yes Sir!!!!!!!!!!

[Tom Huckaby]

Love it.

He sure flighted his ball well that whole round, didn't he?