Wow. I just typed up my thoughts on the front nine and they got eaten after hitting preview since my session had timed out and I was no longer logged in. I'll try and post my thoughts on the back nine and overall course tomorrow. Here are the front nine thoughts (copy and pasted from an external editor); for those of you who are more familiar with the course, please feel to correct and/or add to anything I've written:
The first narrows up far enough out that one ends up hitting a much longer iron shot into the green than they would normally, given the length of the hole. This removes the need to control the spin of the approach shot into the green, which is steeply sloped from back to front. I even saw a few balls bounce up from the front of the green to the middle/back.
The cross bunker on the approach to the second is very severe. I couldn't tell from the fairway and had it been playing into a strong wind or at a long enough yardage, it would have presented a very interesting choice. I imagine if one hits it in one of the fairway bunkers then they'd have to make that choice as well. Missing the green anywhere but short left is a very difficult up and down, so much so that if I had any concerns of not carrying the cross bunker, I'd just lay back and give myself a full shot in.
We played a temp green at the third, but the front right greenside bunker (for the real green) looked very well positioned. This and the apparent (from a distance) slope of the green away and to the left from that bunker, makes one want to position their tee ball in the the left side of the fairway, which requires challenging the trees, bunker, and ravine. Given the length of the shot, that really requires hitting a draw since any shot hit straight will travel too far to the right to have a good angle or will run through into the rough. It's nice to see shaping the ball being important, but this wasn't an issue with the temp green (does my 69 get a big old asterisk?).
Upon reflection, the fourth is an awkward tee shot yardage-wise. The small fairway bunker that you want to avoid is within reach of my 19 degree Raylor, but the large pre-fairway bunker is ~195 to carry, which is cutting close to my carry distance for a three iron. I pured three iron both times, but if I played it again I'd probably hit the Raylor to be safe. The green from the fairway looks to be a reasonable size -- it isn't, it's tiny. Both times I walked up onto the green I was struck by how small it is and felt fortunate to be safely on.
I don't see why anyone would aim anywhere but the front left portion of the green (at the tree directly behind the green) on five. If the ball lands and rolls, it will funnel back to the rest of the green with the slope. If the hole location is on the front then, well, you want it to land there and stick.
Six is awesome and is probably my favorite hole out there. Standing on the tee and looking out at the steep rise into the cliffs with the green in the distance is a great view (and a taste of some of the land to come). I ended up in the bunker left both times and just punching up to the top to have a short wedge in, so I didn't get to experience the thought process of going for the green in two. I'd imagine the further you hit your drive and the closer you get to the steep rise, the more you have to worry about getting the ball up in the air quickly enough to not fly straight into the hill. This sort of obstacle is usually only encountered when playing recovery shots such as from a fairway bunker with a steep lip or trying to go over a group of trees (say on the 18th at Winged Foot West after you've just hit the dumbest shot of your life), so I find it really interesting to see it used as part of the regular challenge of a hole. Is this as much of an issues as it seems?
Looking down at the big drop down to seven I realized that regardless of how low you hit your shot from that tee, if the wind is up it's going to affect your shot because of how much higher the tee is from the green. It was pretty calm so I hit SW and a half PW, but the hole looked like it was begging for a chip mid-iron. I really wish the wind had been up (or I wasn't somewhat concerned about my score) so I could have just tried it for fun. Maybe I'll go back to play and try it out since it's such a cheap green fee.
On eight, the angle of the edge of the cliff in relation to the tee shot presents an interesting option to play further into the corner of the fairway and get closer to the green. The amount the approach shot plays less because of the drop is tough to judge, but I mishit both my approach shots and got to even with the front portion of the green, so it must play a bit shorter. The front left half of the green is way more severely sloped than I imagined. I wondered how they'd find any hole locations on that portion of the green when they get the greens up to Tour or US Open speeds. The up and down to that portion of the green seemed significantly easier from right of the green than left of the green.
The fairway on nine really slopes down and away through the landing area. The shot is fun because you have an awkward downhill and sidehill lie where you're hitting less club than you think you need (since it's getting delofted big time) and the tendency is for the ball to drift towards the ocean. The greenside bunker being on the left makes the conservative line into the green on the right, closer to the ocean. The green sets up best for accepting a high draw, but the lie in the fairway really promotes a low fade. And the green is very undulated so you want to be below the hole here big time.
Please do ... and having played 2 rounds each at Poppy and Pebble, which is the more demanding course? Which is better for match play?
Congrats on your fine play.
Thanks, Mike. Just based on my scores, Poppy would be tougher. But, I don't think that's a fair comparison with only two rounds on each (especially given that, as you know, I botched up my front nine of both my rounds at Poppy). Looking at the entire field's scores is probably a better bet, and my sense (without actually looking) is that Poppy did play tougher even if you look at just those of us who made the 36 hole cut.
I think each is demanding in different ways. Poppy's greens are much larger and heavily contoured with many mounds, separate sections, and areas you don't want to be putting across. Pebble's greens are much smaller and generally have steep but consistent slopes. At Poppy you're trying to hit specific portions of greens and at Pebble you're just trying to hit the green and keep it below the hole if possible. I don't have a card in front of me, but Poppy felt significantly longer and required a lot more long to mid-iron approach shots; at Pebble on Wednesday I felt like I was hitting three quarter to full pitching wedges into most holes, which made hitting the smaller greens much easier.
I think Pebble is better for match play because it has more interesting holes. That, plus the increased likelihood of the wind whipping up or the fog coming in off the sea (like today, which was great I thought) just makes for a more interesting challenge. Pebble also seems like the kind of course where you can make a lot of birdies if you get it going (there were a lot of low numbers on Wednesday) but there's a lot of places not too far off line where it's very tough to make a par. Both of these factors make it possible to fight your way back from a pretty good deficit (like Scott Hardy did this afternoon) so the match never feels like it's over until it's over.