Pebble Beach No. 5 (Old and New)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom & Kalen,

Why are you afraid to post the side by side aerials of both holes ?

The GREAT HOUDINI knows the answer.

[Kalen Braley]

Here is the hole:

To note, only 1 green side bunker, not 2.

Patrick,

Here they are....

[Kalen Braley]

Tom & Kalen,

Why are you afraid to post the side by side aerials of both holes ?

The GREAT HOUDINI knows the answer.

I've posted them Pat, I ain't backing down.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Kalen:  thanks.

No part of my answers here, nor my positions, changes one bit.

I'm just not sure I can handle the victory we've won today, with Mucci FINALLY admitting that looks of a golf hole do matter.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

This may come as a surprise to you, a total shock, but,
Template holes look alike and play alike.

Like in Euclidian Geometry they're similar, but, not necessarily congruent.

I don't know how to post aerials from Google, but, evidently Kalen does, so, Kalen, please post the aerial photos, one beneath the other from the same altitude, for comparison.

Thanks

After this laborious exercise with you two nincompoops, The GREAT HOUDINI finds himself longing to perform one of his favorite tricks..... that of turning into a BAR for a few hours.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

The aerials are posted; nothing has changed.

And who gives a rat's ass whether the DV hole is a template of CPC 16 or not?  That's the great Houdini diversion tactic all over again.  Sure I said earlier on it might be if one changed a key aspect of it... but that is not the point and not my contention.  I never said it was an exact replica.  And I don't care one way or the other about architectural terms.  The point remains that the play of the two holes is remarkably similar - exactly as we have described - and the aerials don't change this one bit.

So the questions remain there for you.

The play of the two holes is indeed very similar.  Why is one great and the other not seen as so?

Just say it's because of the look and this can all end.  You've said so much already, so I am claiming partial victory.  But I am out for further blood.

 

[Kalen Braley]

Tom Huckaby,

This may come as a surprise to you, a total shock, but,
Template holes look alike and play alike.

Like in Euclidian Geometry they're similar, but, not necessarily congruent.

I don't know how to post aerials from Google, but, evidently Kalen does, so, Kalen, please post the aerial photos, one beneath the other from the same altitude, for comparison.

Thanks

After this laborious exercise with you two nincompoops, The GREAT HOUDINI finds himself longing to perform one of his favorite tricks..... that of turning into a BAR for a few hours.

The arials are posted above.  As to getting them at the same elevation that can be tricky because it often depends on the amount of resolution the particular satelitte camera is able to achieve and use on the particular day it was taken. I think the two that are posted are close enough for our purposes.

As to delta view #18, I never claimed it was an exact template, only that its playing characteristics, strategy, distance, and dangers are very similiar.  

This I will say though.  If you take the holes exactly for what they are in land dimensions, and if you switch thier locations,  one being on the Monterey pensisula, the other on a inland course, the one at the ocean location will still be considered the finer one.

[Tom Huckaby]

Kalen:

Agreed re that last part.  The CPC hole is the finer golf hole even without the looks.  I never denied that either.  But that too is not the point.  One is seen as great - perhaps the single best hole in the world.  The other is known by you and me and maybe 100 other golfers who frequent that course. Given the play of the two holes is so similar, why this is so is the point of this exercise.

To that end, I would say this - and this is where this argument usually goes - take that same CPC hole in its exact dimensions and fill the hazard with toxic waste, and make the long and left part a stinking swamp.. and I doubt anyone would tout its greatness.

That's the point here, one which Patrick goes to absurd lengths to deny... or at least used to.  His seemingly changed position today has shown that my teaching and prayers are working magic on him.

Perhaps it is I who am the Great Houdini?

 

TH

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom & Kalen,

The aerial of # 16 at CPC is incomplete at best.

Post the aerial with the entire hole, the tees and green at CPC being visible so that you can see the FORCED carry, even to the bail out area.

The incomplete photo posted is ...... disengenuous at best.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

Huh - scratching my head.  The entire CPC 16 hole is shown - tee, forced carry, green... not sure what you're looking for....

In any case Kalen posted it, and I'm sure just did the best he could to size it the same as the Delta view hole, as per your request.  There's no chicanery going on here, I assure you.

[PThomas]

Patrick and Huck:  if you two keep this up much longer we may have to bring Mr. Cirba in to talk to you about "GCA Anonymous:  How to Get off Never Ending Threads"!

[Tom Huckaby]

Paul:

This is barely five pages.  Please - we're not even close to that ballpark.  Also, Mucci is clearly on the ropes - don't you WANT to see the knockout, or his great escape?

 

I will give up before too long though.

TH

[PThomas]

Paul:

This is barely five pages.  Please - we're not even close to that ballpark.  Also, Mucci is clearly on the ropes - don't you WANT to see the knockout, or his great escape?

 

I will give up before too long though.

TH

The Great Houdini will battle you quite a while Huck.....those Domers don't give up...even if the cause is lost

[Tom Huckaby]

Paul - oh I completely understand that.  His escapes do remain great fun though.... to me anyway.....

Just do understand also he can end this thread with one sentence.

"The beauty of CPC 16 matters, and that's the biggest reason it's a great golf hole and DV18 is just a difficult one."

Seems pretty simple, huh?

Think he'll do it?

[PThomas]

Huck:  Notre Dame will win a bowl game before Patrick gives up

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck:  Notre Dame will win a bowl game before Patrick gives up

Yeah, I know - it just seems pretty simple in this case.  And he could even couch it in his previous silly distinction between on-course and off-course views.. that is, call all the views surrounding CPC16 part of the golf course, so they do count in his warped view which assumes a giant wall 50 yards off-shore... hell I'd even accept that if he wants to save face.

 

[Adam Clayman]

I am assuming that your definition of "unique" means "sole example" or "having no peer"...or something along that line.

Jim, I actually meant unique to the shapes at Pebble Beach. Which I think this green's shape is the only one that has that type of a bend to it.

Would you classify the hole and the green as a "Nader"?

I'll also admit to seeing the site after the clearing, but before the green was built. In my novice like mind I envisioned how cool it would be to maximize the use of the cliff's edge, by tempting the golfer to paly a draw out over it. I suppose this would've been accomplished with a differently shaped green.

[Kalen Braley]

Ok Patrick, I'm going to extra lengths here so there will be no whining in the end.    I know its all apart of your stall/make em wait/deflect the real issue tactic...but thats OK, I'll humor you.

I've taken another shot and even oriented it so we can compare it more accurately to DV#18.  You can see the ENTIRE hole, I triple checked to make sure everything is seen.  But this was the case in my 1st post of this hole as well...but once again I'll humor you.  Here they are:

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

Thanks, I appreciate your efforts.

As you can see, there is NO forced carry necessary to play safe at Delta.

No matter where you play at CPC, you have a forced carry.

The amount of room for the golfer who aims left is enormous at CPC.  There's very little room at Delta

Golfers can play directly at the green and lay up at Delta, no such option exists at CPC.

The greenside bunkering is radically different.

The terrain radically different,
and I suspect that the winds are radically different.

As to Huckaby's insistance that the holes are templates of one another, I do have to concede that they both have tees, some fairway and a green.

Thanks for posting the two aerials side by side.

To declare, in the context of Euclidian Geometry, that these holes are similar, or templates, is a joke.

Only a deranged Bronco, or someone with an agenda (read, outside the boundaries) could draw that comparison.

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

Once again your attempts at deflection are incredible; you truly are a magician.

My "insistence that the holes are templates"?  No clue where you're getting that.  I have explained several times that I do not consider these holes to be templates, nor do I care if they are. I have explained before that my earlier mention of that was only to answer your question about such, and I did say it would be such only with a very key change.  Whether or not these holes are templates is NOT the issue at hand.

I am also making no claims that the two holes are similar or anything of the sort.  I am simply putting forth differences and similarities, then asking questions based on that.  The way I look at things, of course the holes are quite different from each other.  But you seem to count only issues that directly effect play, the way YOU consider such.  Thus I am simply setting out the issues and asking for YOUR conclusions.  

So....you can now see all you seem to need to see about the two golf holes.  Having played both, once again I need to correct you about a few things:

1.  There is definitely a carry over water to a layup left at DV18.  You can see it clearly on the picture; it's even more clear as you play the golf hole - it's the play to the largest area short left of the green.  Of course one can also play a shoter safe teeshot without a carry over water at DV, but we've said that all along.  The most common safe play at DV18 does indeed go over water though.  But as stated before, I grant this as a difference between the golf holes.  Obviously the only way to play safe and not go over water at CPC is to putt it along the walking path.

2.  The greenside bunkering is different.  Yes.  I have granted that before.

3.  Not sure what you mean by the terrain being radically different... sure it is in terms of what it LOOKS LIKE... but in terms of how the two holes play, the terrain is pretty darn similar.  Both have raised tees and raised greens.  The rest is visible in the picture...in terms of the only terrain issues that directly effect play, anyway.

4.  The winds at the two courses are pretty equal in how they change and how hard they can blow.  Feel free to suspect all you want; one might hope you take the word of those who have played the golf holes, but that's the take of an honorable man... something you tend to be only when it doesn't hurt an argument of yours.  

5. You claim:  the amount of room for the golfer who aims left is enormous at CPC.  There's very little room at Delta.  True re DV... not very true at all re CPC.  Most misses left go over the cliff and into the sand/ocean on the far side... directly similar to the misses left at DV, which go into or over the fence.  Oh I get that at CPC one hypothetically can play a layup way out into 17 fairway, and thus there's more room for that in terms of hitting it too far at CPC... but I have to believe that's an option that's damn near never tried, so I can't see that counting for much.  In 100% honesty the layup shots look pretty similar to me, with the only difference being one can hit a very short grounder at DV where of course he needs to get the ball airborn at CPC.

So there we have it.  Those are the differences you highlight.  Some are valid, some are not.  As opposed to this, we have these similarities:

1)  200+ yard carry over water
2)  Bailout area left; strategic choice available to go left if one can't make the carry
3)  Both the tee box and green are elevated
4)  Mounded behind the green.
5)  Water is in play short and to the right of the green.
6) Green side bunker(s)
7) Lost ball potential left
8 ) Unpredictable and sometimes fierce winds

So once again I ask you:  why is CPC16 seen as great, and why is DV18 seen only as difficult?

The question stands.  Why are you so afraid to answer it?  Hell I've even given you a way to do so and save face... it's a few posts back.....

TH

[Patrick_Mucci]

1.  There is definitely a carry over water to a layup left at DV18.  

NO, there's NOT.

You can lay up straight away or to the left and you will have NO forced carry over water.[/color]

You can see it clearly on the picture; it's even more clear as you play the golf hole - it's the play to the largest area short left of the green.  Of course one can also play a shoter safe teeshot without a carry over water at DV, but we've said that all along.  The most common safe play at DV18 does indeed go over water though.  

That's not true.
SAFE PLAY IS SAFE PLAY, not risky play
And, safe play at Delta has NO forced carry, as it does at CPC[/color]

2.  The greenside bunkering is different.  Yes.  I have granted that before.

OK[/color]

3.  Not sure what you mean by the terrain being radically different... sure it is in terms of what it LOOKS LIKE... but in terms of how the two holes play, the terrain is pretty darn similar.  Both have raised tees and raised greens.  The rest is visible in the picture...in terms of the only terrain issues that directly effect play, anyway.

CPC sits high above its surrounds, Delta doesn't.
Usually, that's indicative of a site subject to windier conditions[/color]

4.  The winds at the two courses are pretty equal in how they change and how hard they can blow.  Feel free to suspect all you want; one might hope you take the word of those who have played the golf holes, but that's the take of an honorable man... something you tend to be only when it doesn't hurt an argument of yours.

See my comment above.
Having played CPC more than a few times at different times, I vividly recall the winds on the days I played.
When Ocean spray hits you in the face on the tee, it's usually a good indicator that the wind's up.[/color]

5. You claim:  the amount of room for the golfer who aims left is enormous at CPC.  There's very little room at Delta.  True re DV... not very true at all re CPC.  Most misses left go over the cliff and into the sand/ocean on the far side... directly similar to the misses left at DV, which go into or over the fence.  Oh I get that at CPC one hypothetically can play a layup way out into 17 fairway, and thus there's more room for that in terms of hitting it too far at CPC... but I have to believe that's an option that's damn near never tried, so I can't see that counting for much.  In 100% honesty the layup shots look pretty similar to me, with the only difference being one can hit a very short grounder at DV where of course he needs to get the ball airborn at CPC.

The comparative landforms as evidenced by the aerials seem to indicate that there's very little room left at Delta, and far more room left at CPC[/color]

So there we have it.  Those are the differences you highlight.  Some are valid, some are not.  As opposed to this, we have these similarities:

1)  200+ yard carry over water  Only in one direction[/color]
2)  Bailout area left; strategic choice available to go left if one can't make the carry  Not really.
A shot to the left at CPC still requires a forced carry over water, the same shot at Delta doesn't, and, the bail out area at Delta is straight ahead 80-100 yards, leaving one with NO risk off the tee[/color]
3)  Both the tee box and green are elevated
I would doubt any similarity to CPC or substantive elevation change at Delta.
How high above the water is the tee at Delta ?
How high above the water is the green at Delta ?
How about at CPC ?
I suspect that your comparison is seriously flawed.[/color]  
4)  Mounded behind the green.
    Absent good photos of Delta, I can't compare the two[/color]
5)  Water is in play short and to the right of the green.
You could say that about Baltusrol Lower # 4 and a zillion other holes.[/color]
6) Green side bunker(s)
The bunker patterns aren't remotely close to one another[/color]
7) Lost ball potential left
HOW ?[/color]
8 ) Unpredictable and sometimes fierce winds
I'll have to rely on your experience, but, are you telling me that a hole that sits high above the ocean is subject to the same winds as can be found in Pittsburg, California ?[/color]

So once again I ask you:  why is CPC16 seen as great, and why is DV18 seen only as difficult?

You're trying to force an oversized square peg in a round hole, and it won't fit.

The answer is:  Because
The holes aren't remotely similar.
They would never be classified as templates.[/color]

The question stands.  Why are you so afraid to answer it ?

I've never been afraid to answer it.
In fact, I've answered it dozens of times.
The holes aren't similar, they aren't templates of one another, they bear little resemblance to one another.  That's why[/color]  

Hell I've even given you a way to do so and save face... it's a few posts back.....

It's not a matter of me saving face, it's a matter of you not being able to distinguish the terrain, configuration and architectural qualities of both holes and the juxtaposition of the respective features to one another on each hole.

Have you asked TEPaul if his faithful guidedog CoorShaw is available ?  You're in desperate need of assistance.

If we were having a debate with respect to the comparative form and substance of the 4th at NGLA, the 3rd at Piping Rock, the 8th at The Creek or the 13th at Yale, I could see your point, but, the hole at Delta doesn't bear any substantive similarity to the 16th at CPC, in terrain, configuration and architecture.[/color]

[Tom Huckaby]

Sigh.

I must say it's rather frustrating how you claim knowledge of a hole you've never seen - even to the extent of asserting superiority in knowledge over those of us who have played the golf hole.

So let's try this again.

Differences:

1.  There is indeed a carry over water at DV for the layup.  As I've described countless times, any shot that would actually advance you to the hole and give a simple shot in requires a carry over water.  You can see it in the picture.  Yes one can safely avoid the water on a VERY short shot.  But I'd venture to guess the number of instances of this occurring is infitesimally small.  But it counts in your world, so we'll leave that as a difference.

2.  Ok

3. Delta's tee and green ARE raised!  You can't see this in the picture of course, but how many times must I tell you it's so?  I've been there Patrick, have you?  Yes, each is a bit more raised at CPC, but not enough to make it a significant difference.

4.  I've played BOTH courses - have you?  So who would be more expert on the wind conditions of each?  On top of that I am quite familar with the surrounding area of each course - are you?  Man you have to give this up.  I am here to tell you the wind conditions are quite similar at these courses.

5.  There is indeed more room left at CPC - but not in an area that the golfer is likely to ever use, as I've explained.

Similarities:

1)  200+ yard carry over water   Only in one direction
Of course - the direction directly at the hole.  Never said otherwise.

2)  Bailout area left; strategic choice available to go left if one can't make the carry  Not really.
Hell yes it is - when I last played DV, I believe 2 out of the 4 in my group couldn't make the carry and went left.  But I guess you know better  having played the hole so many times.  

3)  Both the tee box and green are elevated
I would doubt any similarity to CPC or substantive elevation change at Delta.
How high above the water is the tee at Delta ?
How high above the water is the green at Delta ?
How about at CPC ?
I suspect that your comparison is seriously flawed.  

And you'd be wrong.  As for the exact levels of how each is raised, such would depend on the tide at CPC and how high they keep the water in the lake at DV.  IN any case each would be a bit more raised at CPC - but not enough to make this a huge distinctive difference.  In each case, balls that fail to carry the water will be wet - there is no bouncing on the green.  As Kalen described, that grass bank in front of the green at DV is pretty steep, such that all balls that hit it roll back into the water... pretty much the same effect as hitting the wall at CPC.
 
4)  Mounded behind the green.
    Absent good photos of Delta, I can't compare the two
Correct, but you could just take my word for it.  But I guess that's outside of your abilities.

5)  Water is in play short and to the right of the green.
You could say that about Baltusrol Lower # 4 and a zillion other holes.
Certainly.  I'm not saying this is particularly notable, only that it is the same in the playing of the two golf holes.

6) Green side bunker(s)
The bunker patterns aren't remotely close to one another
Correct.  But a bunker exists that effects the play at DV, so it's at least in the ballpark.  If no bunkers existed, then we'd eliminate this.  In any case feel free to eliminate this; it doesn't hurt my case at all.

7) Lost ball potential left
HOW ?
Are you serious?  Into the ocean at CPC, over the fence at DV.  I've explained this several times already also.  You can also see it on the google earth look at DV.  My my but you are getting forgetful.  

8 ) Unpredictable and sometimes fierce winds
I'll have to rely on your experience, but, are you telling me that a hole that sits high above the ocean is subject to the same winds as can be found in Pittsburg, California ?

NOW you say you'll rely on my experience?  Gee thanks.  But yes Patrick, the winds can be varied and fierce in each place.

**********************************

Now back to the question.

Once again, the issue of whether they are templates or not is irrelevant.  Nice try to keep coming back to something that has no bearing.

The issue is that in truth, no matter how many times you try to debate the specifics, in the playing of the golf holes, there are a few pretty insignificant differences, compared with a lot of very basic and important similarities.  You can keep trying to debate this, but all the evidence is right there for all the world to see.

So... care to take a stab at REALLY answering the question?

It's very simple and this can all end very easily.... the answer is patently obvious to everyone but you....

Why is CPC16 great and DV18 not?

You still haven't answered... that is unless "because DV18 is not a template", and continuing to debate the specifics regarding a hole you've never seen, is your sole and only answer.  And if that's it, than that is pretty weak.

TH

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

Here are the side by side aerial photos, again.

You keep on saying, "Who are you going to believe, me, Tom Huckaby or your OWN EYES ?"

I'll take my own eyes.

That you think these holes are similar is mind boggling.





There is NO FORCED carry by going left and that's not a safe bail out shot.  The safe bail out shot is an 80 yard shot right at the green, leaving a 120 yard shot to the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

1.  There is indeed a carry over water at DV for the layup.
As I've described countless times, any shot that would actually advance you to the hole and give a simple shot in requires a carry over water.  You can see it in the picture.  Yes one can safely avoid the water on a VERY short shot.  But I'd venture to guess the number of instances of this occurring is infitesimally small.  But it counts in your world, so we'll leave that as a difference.

Why would someone want to hit the ball 110 yards and risk the water when they can hit it 80 yards and not risk the water ?  What incremental benefit is gained by hitting into the narrow neck  ?   NONE, therefore, that's not a viable bail out area.   Tell me you understand that.[/color]

3. Delta's tee and green ARE raised!  You can't see this in the picture of course, but how many times must I tell you it's so?  I've been there Patrick, have you?  Yes, each is a bit more raised at CPC, but not enough to make it a significant difference.

What's the elevation differential between the tee and the fairway directly in front of the tee ?

What's the elevation difference between the green and the water ?

Now, what are those differences at CPC ?

There's NO comparison.[/color]

4.  I've played BOTH courses - have you?  So who would be more expert on the wind conditions of each?  On top of that I am quite familar with the surrounding area of each course - are you?  Man you have to give this up.  I am here to tell you the wind conditions are quite similar at these courses.
I don't believe it.[/color]

5.  There is indeed more room left at CPC - but not in an area that the golfer is likely to ever use, as I've explained.
Golfers use whatever room is available, intentionally or unintentionally.   If it exists, they'll use it.   It doesn't exist at Delta.[/color]

Similarities:

1)  200+ yard carry over water   Only in one direction
Of course - the direction directly at the hole.  Never said otherwise.

2)  Bailout area left; strategic choice available to go left if one can't make the carry  Not really.
Hell yes it is - when I last played DV, I believe 2 out of the 4 in my group couldn't make the carry and went left.  But I guess you know better  having played the hole so many times.  

The dimensions of the area don't support your claim.[/color]

3)  Both the tee box and green are elevated
I would doubt any similarity to CPC or substantive elevation change at Delta.

That means that they're NOT similar and that there's very little in the way of elevation changes at Delta, which, you've been claiming.[/color]

How high above the water is the tee at Delta ?
How high above the water is the green at Delta ?
How about at CPC ?
I suspect that your comparison is seriously flawed.  


And you'd be wrong.  As for the exact levels of how each is raised, such would depend on the tide at CPC and how high they keep the water in the lake at DV.

That's pure B.S. and the response of a desperate man.[/color]

IN any case each would be a bit more raised at CPC -[size=4x]
A BIT ?[/size]  That's more B.S.

but not enough to make this a huge distinctive difference.

So you wouldn't consider 10, 20 or 30 feet substantive ?[/color]  

4)  Mounded behind the green.
    Absent good photos of Delta, I can't compare the two
Correct, but you could just take my word for it.  But I guess that's outside of your abilities.

That's your doing.
False in one, false in many.
Your judgement and conclusions on this hole don't inspire confidence.[/color]

5)  Water is in play short and to the right of the green.
You could say that about Baltusrol Lower # 4 and a zillion other holes.
Certainly.  I'm not saying this is particularly notable, only that it is the same in the playing of the two golf holes.

6) Green side bunker(s)
The bunker patterns aren't remotely close to one another
Correct.  But a bunker exists that effects the play at DV, so it's at least in the ballpark.  If no bunkers existed, then we'd eliminate this.  In any case feel free to eliminate this; it doesn't hurt my case at all.

IN THE BALL PARK ?  You must be kidding, the bunker configurations on the two holes are radically different.

Now do you understand why I can't accept your word ?

Your so desperate to force your conclusion that you're distorting the component pieces of your argument.[/color]

7) Lost ball potential left
HOW ?
Are you serious?  Into the ocean at CPC, over the fence at DV.  I've explained this several times already also.  You can also see it on the google earth look at DV.  My my but you are getting forgetful.  

There's so much room left on CPC.
Over the fence at Delta is OB, not a lost ball, and that's another difference.  Stroke and distance versus two club lengths.[/color]

8 ) Unpredictable and sometimes fierce winds
I'll have to rely on your experience, but, are you telling me that a hole that sits high above the ocean is subject to the same winds as can be found in Pittsburg, California ?

NOW you say you'll rely on my experience?  Gee thanks.  But yes Patrick, the winds can be varied and fierce in each place.


That's not the question.
The question is, can you equate them.
Are they equal in velocity and consistency ?[/color]

**********************************

Now back to the question.

Once again, the issue of whether they are templates or not is irrelevant.  Nice try to keep coming back to something that has no bearing.

The issue is that in truth, no matter how many times you try to debate the specifics, in the playing of the golf holes, there are a few [size=4x]pretty insignificant differences[/size], compared with a lot of very basic and important similarities.  You can keep trying to debate this, but all the evidence is right there for all the world to see.

Everybody but you can see how the two holes are dramatically different.[/color]

So... care to take a stab at REALLY answering the question?


See my comments above[/color]

It's very simple and this can all end very easily.... the answer is patently obvious to everyone but you....

Why is CPC16 great and DV18 not?

I've answered it repetitively, you just don't want to accept the answer.[/color]

You still haven't answered... that is unless "because DV18 is not a template", and continuing to debate the specifics regarding a hole you've never seen, is your sole and only answer.  And if that's it, than that is pretty weak.

The answer is obvious to everyone who's viewed the aerials.
You just don't get it.  And, it's not because of what's on or just below the horizon.[/color]

[Tom Huckaby]

Patrick:

OK, it's obvious now that you just won't accept the very, very obvious similarities of these two golf holes.  I've listed them countless times, you keep arguing with me - even though I've played both of them and you haven't played DV.

But let's just remember this exercise - the time that Patrick "you can't really tell from photos" Mucci relied on photos over the experience of someone who has played a particular golf hole.  I tell you no one ever chips a ball 70- yards straight at the hole, that damn near all who can't make the full carry do play left, over the edge of the water, about 150-160 off the tee, you continue to tell me you know better about the safe shot because you see it in the photos.  I tell you the tee at CPC is raised a bit more, you demand exact measurements because you also can't see that in the photos.  I tell you how the winds are and you flatly say "I don't believe it."

I'd say you're calling me a liar, but that would be too harsh.  I just continue to laugh at the lengths you'll go to in these arguments... whereas I have no axe to grind other than just trying to get you to see the truth....

But if any other Bay Area regulars are reading this, can you clue Patrick in on the winds we get out there?  That it's not just right next to the ocean where strong winds can occur?  I doubt we have any regular players of Delta View, but if so, can you clue him in as to the other details he continues to argue about?

On second thought, don't bother.  He won'e believe any of you either, relying on his far superior analysis made from 3000 miles away relying on two-dimensional aerial photos.  

Patrick, you are amazing.  And you have the gall to call ME "desparate."

So I give up.  But before I do, I would like to make one key correction:

You say:

"Over the fence at Delta is OB, not a lost ball, and that's another difference.  Stroke and distance versus two club lengths."

Please tell me you understand the rules of golf....that OB abd lost ball are the same thing... and that you understand that they play the ocean as "part of the course" at CPC.

Good lord, I've been arguing all this time with a nincompoop.

Bottom line is this:  anyone who has played these two golf holes - plus all others with no axe to grind, nothing to prove, no other agenda - can see that the playing of these two holes is has a lot of similarities and a few rather trivial differences.  What the world also can see as the big differences is HOW THEY LOOK.  And of course, that's what makes the CPC hole great and the DV one just "difficult" and never cited as great by anyone.

Of course you know this also.  And I know you know.  And I do have the hope that some day I'll get you to admit it.  But I have a bit of Quixote in me, for sure.

 

TH