[Jon Spaulding]

My reaction to the "renovation" was fairly positive due to the improvement in playing conditions. It was typically a sloppy mess, even in summertime.....but when I played in December after a good rain it was very playable. There is virtually nothing from a design standpoint that changed across the North course.

On this hole, just added white sand and gave the bunkers some squiggles. What I find weak is that it plays straight downwind; so the bunker is eye candy with 500 houses in the background; very busy as we can see from the photo. The landing area slopes off to the right fairly hard with some pushed up containment keeping balls out of the canyon on the right. So we have nothing to decide on the tee, other than to hit driver and then play from the right side of the fairway with a short iron. Simply no reason to challenge the preferred line which runs out too quickly on the LH side. But it "looks" like a split fairway..... so the masses that pay $250 to play here are driven into some form of an architectural hysteria.

Also, this hole is eerily similar to #4 on the same course. #4 is a bit better as it really challenges one to take the preferred line with a reward if he pulls it off.

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

Yeah, I didn't think it looked finished yet.  Too bad it's not yours.  I'd be happy to come over for a little back yard BBQ.  That hill side has loads of money.  The great American dream fulfilled. 

Jon,

I thought it played fairly firm, although not as firm as Oak Quarry or Rustic that I'd played in the preceding days.  I'd imagine they would have difficulty achieving a really lush green look with the Bermuda.  I take it they don't overseed.

The 25 additional bunkers didn't make a difference to you?  They seem to have added a long one on the inside of the turn on the first hole.  I found it off the tee, so it certainly grabbed my interest.

On this hole it looks like they lengthened the bunker back toward the tee quite substantially, as well as adding white sand and squiggles.  By the way, I saw this quote from the director of agronomy, Steve Thomas about the sand, saying "It is 75 percent crushed marble and 25 percent USGA tan to tone it down a little bit. Fazio didn't want the bright white out there."

There wasn't much wind assist when I was there.  Still, you must be an animal if you have a short iron into a 450 yard hole that plays uphill.  Can you not blow it over the centre bunker?  Yes, I did notice that the left side ran out - but it was beyond my driving range, so the left side still looked like a better option for me.  In the end I don't think it works really well as a strategic hole because there are no clear risks or rewards for choosing one route over the other (except for long hitters like yourself).

Since I didn't pay $250 I hope that excludes me from being one of the hysterical masses.     I kinda doubt that the clientele of this course are likely to be architecturally aware enough to get hysterical about a centreline bunker.

The tee shots (absent the dual fairway on 7) are similar looking on 4 and 7.  But 4 had more bend to the left making a carry over the left bunker more of a true risk/reward situation.  Of course, I couldn't carry the left bunker on 4, (I tried) so it wasn't really an option for me.  The green on 4 looked more precariously perched to me than the one on 7.

[corey miller]

Bryan

Which course did you prefer this or Rustic Canyon?

I would have to disagree with your characterization of this as a "slight remake".  Yes perhaps archtiecturally, but certainly not $ wise when you have Fazio involved. 

It also seems that some of the changes would never have had to have been made were more thought given during the design process.  Maybe an architect could comment on that observation?

[Jon Spaulding]

Corey; not to answer for Bryan, but Pelican is the inverse of Rustic on all levels. Seriously.......a good vs evil/dark side vs force kind of deal. The only thing better about it is that it's 90 miles closer to my house.

Bryan; the first hole and the lengthening of the 14th were the only real significance I found in the renovation; design-wise...but the first has a very wide fairway so the new bunker is not too influential on the first swing of the day. It looked like a mess over there so I kept off to the left. I found the balance of new bunkering superfluous and more about increasing the volume of white sand.

I don't see the course ever playing too fast or too firm; overseeding is a distinct possibility although they did not this year.

When I played #7 had 15-20mph of help so I had 125 in after hitting a hard driver over the bunker. At that landing area the hole really flattens out so the uphill portion is more visual off the tee. Normal conditions after, say, 11am would be 10-15mph of help. I am not an animal but a couple of bloody marys and good contact make for good results.

#4 certainly has a tougher green than does #7, along with a better tee shot....just a better hole.

[Bryan Izatt]

Corey,

I liked them both, but they are quite different from an experience point of view, architecturaly, and in the land on which they are built.  I'd certainly go back to Rustic more often simply because of the price.  Architecturally and as a golf challenge it would be more of an even split.

I think it was Joel who termed it a slight remake, not me.

Do you have some information on the cost of the renovation?  I doubt that Fazio's fee would be the primary source of the renovation cost.  The work was done by local contractors.  Do you know that the renovations that Fazio might have directed were more expensive than if another architect had proposed and manged them?

I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to suggest, as you are, that Fazio, through lack of thought,  made design errors 15 years ago, that had to be corrected now.  Some good part of the work looks like things that probably need to be done at all courses after heavy play over that many years.  Some part of it reflects things that they learned from having the course in play for some time.  Clearly, the drainage at Rustic wasn't quite right at the beginning either.  They endured a flood event from which they are still recovering and having to rejigger the drainage.  Sh@t happens.  I have read that Pelican knowingly over-planted initially to have an immediate impact on the look of the course, with the intention of pulling a lot of it out later.  That later arrived as indicated in the list of renovations above.
 

[Bryan Izatt]

Jon,

To each their own.  It's a big world out there.  To me they are both good courses, just different in look, style, challenge and experience.  To describe it as good vs evil seems to be a little over-the-top.

I really liked the short 4's here better than Rustic.  The 5's were a wash - I liked them both, but they are decidedly different.  Different is good.  Of the 3's I liked the 8th and 15th at Rustic; the rest on both courses were not inspiring.

I liked the 14th at Pelican the best of all.  The hole just appealed to my eye.  The tee shot bending around to the right .....



and the second to an uphill skyline green where the pin is hiding behind the left bunker.



I'd guess the F&F probably isn't in their future - the ultra-green look year round probably goes with the kind of course they are trying to present.

[David Stamm]

Corey,

I liked them both, but they are quite different from an experience point of view, architecturaly, and in the land on which they are built.  I'd certainly go back to Rustic more often simply because of the price.  Architecturally and as a golf challenge it would be more of an even split.

  

Not to gang up on you, Bryan, but architecturally Pelican Hill can not touch Rustic. And Rustic's drainage issues, if you can call them that, stems form the fact that it sits in a riverbed and when So Cal's heavy rains come, it doesn't matter what you engineer into it. The trade off for building on great sandy soil, I guess.....

[David Stamm]

Jon,

To each their own.  It's a big world out there.  To me they are both good courses, just different in look, style, challenge and experience.  To describe it as good vs evil seems to be a little over-the-top.

I really liked the short 4's here better than Rustic.  The 5's were a wash - I liked them both, but they are decidedly different.  Different is good.  Of the 3's I liked the 8th and 15th at Rustic; the rest on both courses were not inspiring.

I liked the 14th at Pelican the best of all.  The hole just appealed to my eye.  The tee shot bending around to the right .....

 

Wow, Bryan. I'm really surprised to see you state you like the short par 4's better. 3 and 12 at RC are two of the best in So Cal. I can't think of one at PH that even comes close. As far as the par 3's, what about 6 and 17 at RC? 15 is the weakest of the lot in my IMO. While the 3's at the South at PH are more memorable than the North, either one's collection of one shotters is not as good as RC's.

[Bryan Izatt]

No problem with the "ganging up"  David.  Different people have different tastes.

Drainage-wise I understand the location of Rustic.  PH isn't exactly great from that perspective either being situated on a fairly significant hill with lots of barrancas (or is that arroyos).

I guess it depends on what you like in your short par 4's.  I've only played the third at RC three times so I can stand to be corrected.  The first time I played it, Dave Moriarty went to great lengths to explain the options of the the hole to me (for which I am thankful).  But all three times I played it I hit driver and all three times I was in the fringe front left or back right.  So, it being driveable is good in my book.  And all three times, I wasn't able to get up and down for birdie (probably a pretty pithy comment on my short game) which indicates at least that the green complex, like all those at Rustic, provides some challenges.  But, if all three times I play it, there is only one option that I choose to play, then I'm not sure the options are all that relevant.  Maybe with more plays in different conditions I would develop more respect for the options.

About 12, I remember the longish thread about it some months back and I don't want to rehash that territory.  I appreciate the subtleties and nuances of the second shot and green.  Dave Moriarty explained those to me too.  But, the subtlety didn't leave me inspired at all.  The drive could be played almost anywhere and the setting was less than stellar.

In SoCal, in my very limited experience, I liked the 6th at Soule Park a lot as a short 4 (disfigured though it is).

I agree re the 3's.  RC's are better.  The one's at PH were uninspiring.  The only one I sort of liked was the 12th.  At RC I kind of liked 15.  Different strokes.  Six is a good hole but a little too punitive for me.

I hope all this doesn't get me excommunicated form the SoCal GCA fraternity.   

[David Stamm]

In SoCal, in my very limited experience, I liked the 6th at Soule Park a lot as a short 4 (disfigured though it is).

I agree re the 3's.  RC's are better.  The one's at PH were uninspiring.  The only one I sort of liked was the 12th.  At RC I kind of liked 15.  Different strokes.  Six is a good hole but a little too punitive for me.

I hope all this doesn't get me excommunicated form the SoCal GCA fraternity.   

No fear about the excommunication, Bryan. Yes, you're right, we all have different tastes. And I agree, 6 at Soule Park is a very solid par 4. I think I would stack it up against any of the short 4's on the courses we are speaking about.

[Jon Spaulding]

Jon,

To each their own.  It's a big world out there.  To me they are both good courses, just different in look, style, challenge and experience.  To describe it as good vs evil seems to be a little over-the-top.

I really liked the short 4's here better than Rustic.  The 5's were a wash - I liked them both, but they are decidedly different.  Different is good.  Of the 3's I liked the 8th and 15th at Rustic; the rest on both courses were not inspiring.

I liked the 14th at Pelican the best of all.  The hole just appealed to my eye.  The tee shot bending around to the right .....

Good vs. evil was the closest I could dream up; $250 vs $50; white sand vs. real sand; one-dimensional vs. multi dimensional; Fazio vs Hanselford.......I will go on record that I enjoy Pelican, but it simply does not stand up to RC on any front other than proximity.

Are there any short 4's @ Pelican North, other than 13, which is a gutsy play with no reward for the driver? I do like the 14th; it is a stronger hole with the added length. I find the par 5's and the 3's at RC very solid; you are hereby invited pledge a growing fraternity which finds the 12th...... 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()