I took tons of photos. If someone will tell me how, I will be happy to post them.
PG is better than before the renovation, but anything would have improved it. PG is no longer a pedestrian golf course with flat, uninteresting greens. Now, it is all about the greens. I'm not certain I agree with all of Forrest's artificial improvements (choc drops, dimples, etc). I question whether the course is possibly overdone. Eccentricity is positive when old or natural, but it can be annoying when forced. Personally, I think they overdid it in places, but golf course design is an art, and art invites discussion. Forrest had 5 million dollars, a so-so piece of land, and I respect the effort. Anybody can criticize, but this is a helluva' thing to do.
1 remains a terrific opening hole. Carry the bunkers left, cut the corner, and it can reward you.
2 is good, as well. Green changes and additional bunkers add interest.
3 is also an improvement, with better bunkering in front, and a large, difficult green complex.
The changes in 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are a give/take push. The course no longer has two back-to-back, 90 degree holes in 5 and 6. But, the new #5 is much easier. So why did I hit driver, wedge, and then three-putt from above the cup? Guess the green does provide a decent defense.
6 is pretty, but similar in theme to 15 and 16, where the greens also lie close to the water. A short pin allows you to over club, and let the ball trickle back. I like the hole. Essentially, it begins with the 2nd shot on the old #6, but to a improved green fronted by much nicer visuals.
7 is near great. I question the strategy of a bunker short/right, but Forrest told me it provides a view of the green. Why not put the bunker left? To me, the green invites entry from that side. The concrete path, there, creates an additional and inadvertent hazard.
I double-crossed a hope-for fade, hit the path, and my ball bounded 30 yards long, into the rough. That was weird, and I would assume not part of the strategy. Would like to see more of this biarritz style green from the fairway. Longer hitters will be able to just blast away, and then pitch or lob in, assuming they shorten the rough. And, for the sake of pace of play, they will have to.
8 turns what used to be a long par 4 into a not-so-memorable par 5.
Sorry.
9 takes what used to be a challenging, risk/reward par 5, and turns it into a conservative par 4, but I didn't mind that. In the old days, you hit driver, and then decided to lay back, or else carry a creek 100 yards from the green. Now, the hole is short enough to be stupid and go for it if you're a strong player. For all the canting and potato-chipping of greens, this one is fairly flat, even though it requires one of the shorter approaches.
10 is a large and beautiful hole with much improved bunkering. It has that dimple to the left, and half a Volkswagen buried to the right. Why? Despite noted inspirations from the other side of the pond, I question their motivations. Forrest noted that the green is large for the distance, however---"Three greens in one," he said, so you ought to be able to hit your spot. If you miss, it's more miniature golf.
11 was a big disappointment. Water along the right, OB left, and a bunker some 220 out, guarding the corner. It requires a long, right to left drive. Hit it, and you're rewarded with a shot into a blind, hourglass green that slopes away from the back half, and probably will not hold your shot. So, what is the reward for risking that big drive?
Not fair.
14 green is interesting due to a valley running through it, but could not figure out a proper angle from which to attack it. Bump it? Fly it? Very capricious.
15 chocolate drops...clearly, Forrest is building a golf course and a series of obstacles, but this feels like a pinball machine. To the folks in my group, they popped out of nowhere and did not fit the terrain. That said, they do make the hole more interesting. Fly 'em, or cut it around them. Maybe that is what he intended. I see the strategy, but it feels imposed on this hole.
17-I like the shortening of this hole, and how the green now sits much closer to the creek. Go for it? Lay back? Most players can hit this green with a long iron and wedge. Great sucker hole, and also more picturesque. Less is certainly more.
18-The green is too severe for the distance, and for many golfers to reach in precision in two. I like how Forrest opened up the right side for a more direct approach. The left/center bunker is intimidating, and introduces a go-for-it, or lay back risk-reward element. But the green is going to hurt many players, and, I suspect, leave many leaving PG with negative feelings.
After the round, Forrest asked if I would want to play it again. Yes.
But certainly not at the $50k they're supposedly asking for memberships. The market will have to shake down on this one.
Forrest, it was very nice meeting you and I enjoyed our conversation.
I would like to see and/or play some of your other courses. Will post my official review on my KGO site in a few days.