[Bob_Huntley]

A week or so ago  twelve hearty GCA'ers played MPCC's Shore Course.

There are a couple of things about the course that I think need some fine tuning, or indeed, some radical changes.

Please, let loose the cannons and fire away.

You will not hurt my/our sensibilities.

Bob

[Kyle Henderson]

#18 certainly needs reconstitution to bring it up to par (sorry) with #'s 5-15. #'s 2, 16 and 17 could also use a bit of tweaking, but as the old saying goes, "If you wow them in the end..."

I'll spare everyone my amateuristic visions for #18, particularly as I haven't seen the course since last summer (2007).

As is, the course is still among my handful of absolute favorites.

Edit: No one alive would be likely to improve the course, try as they might. It's probably best to leave the course as is, lest someone else suck the Strantz from the soil there. Did Forrest Fezler actually finish #18 after Mr. Strantz passed on?

[Tim Bert]

Bob - I thought the course was fabulous.  As I told John Mayhugh and others on the trip, I enjoyed it more than my round at Pebble Beach.  I don't expect that to be the popular opinion, but I thought the round was that much fun.

I liked the movement in the fairways, and I thought the greens were wonderful.  I really enjoyed the mix of having 5 par 5s and 5 par 3s.  I'm probably a little less of a par 4 guy than many on this site.  That being said, there are some mighty fine par 4s as well.  Coming down the home stretch in particular, I enjoyed 15 and 17.

I would agree with Kyle's comments re:18.  I thought that it was among the weaker holes.

The only definite improvement I can think of off the top of my head is better identification from the tee of that hazard crossing the 12th fairway!  I should have done a better job checking the aerials like Kalen.  Of course, that wouldn't impact member or repeat play.

   

[David_Elvins]

Bob,

18 green appeared to be the only glaring 'mistake'.  The way the shaping blended to the natural ground was noticably inferior to the rest of the course, as was the fun evident in playing so many of the other holes.  I am curious to hear what people thought of the tee shot on 18.   

IMO I thought there were examples of other holes that were maybe a bit busy (11?) and some of the green shaping I wasn't a huge fan of.  However I think that is just what the course is and I am happy to accept that as part of the ride and wouldnt recommend they changed.

EDIT I wonder if the 5th would be a better hole with the back tee removed. 

[Kyle Henderson]

 As I told John Mayhugh and others on the trip, I enjoyed it more than my round at Pebble Beach.  I don't expect that to be the popular opinion, but I thought the round was that much fun.
   

Jon Spaulding said exactly the same thing today (during our round at Harding Park). I haven't played Pebble, but I did walk it during a tournament and I'm inclined to agree with the both of you.

[David Stamm]

Bob, I think it easily has one of the best collection of par 3's that I've played. 11 is understandably the one most remember, but the green on 9 is just awesome. I also liked 7 very much. I think it has one of the best opening holes I've played. Some of my other favorites are 10, which is a wonderful par 5 (and a great green), 12 (I love the way that hole made me feel) and 15 (again, I love the skyline green). I will agree that 18 is a bit of a downer, but the course has to return to the clubhouse one way or another so perhaps that the hole is uphill contributes to this. Not that I don't like uphill holes, I do if done right, but because it is the finishing hole this may work against it as opposed to whether it came earlier, if that makes any sense. It doesn't have a real brutish par 4, aside from 8, but I don't think it really works against it because I really didn't pay attention to this fact until I reviewed the scorecard. It is without a doubt one of the most enjoyable courses I've had the pleasure to play and is a fitting legacy to the talents of the late Mr Strantz.

[BVince]

Bob, I did not play it with the GCA guys, but your course does not need any changes.  Seriously, it is one on the best courses I have played and that is saying a lot.  In addition, it is the late work of Mike Strantz and that means something.  I would be so lucky as to be a member of a course so well designed and maintained as yours.  The entire course is interesting, challenging, and fun.  Best wishes,

Bryon

[Jordan Wall]

 As I told John Mayhugh and others on the trip, I enjoyed it more than my round at Pebble Beach.  I don't expect that to be the popular opinion, but I thought the round was that much fun.
   

Jon Spaulding said exactly the same thing today (during our round at Harding Park). I haven't played Pebble, but I did walk it during a tournament and I'm inclined to agree with the both of you.

No matter how good of a course MPCC is, it could not compare to the joys of walking down the 18th fairway at Pebble in the sunset.

[John Mayhugh]

Overall, the Shore course is splendid.  I had to spend a quite a bit of time thinking about weaknesses.  Here's what I came up with:

All the rocks look a bit fussy and maybe a little too much like what you would see in Arizona.  Obviously, the ocean makes sure you don't confuse where you are!  I understand that a lot of these were already there, but it seems that some of the smaller ones that are scattered about don't really need to be there.

I didn't like the hazard on the right on #17.  The hole didn't seem to fit with the rest of the course.  Again, though, I learned that this stream was a part of the land.

Finally, I didn't like the walk back to the clubhouse from 18 green.  Otherwise, I didn't mind the 18th hole as much as some others have.  I liked the large green contour on the left that assists your ball to some hole locations and the way you need to challenge the fairway bunker on the left in order to have the best chance to use it.  18 didn't strike me as a bad hole.  Rather, it's just a mundane finish to an otherwise spectacular looking course.

What I did like fills up a much larger list.  The views and vistas on this course are simply spectacular.  Strantz did an incredible job of presenting opportunities to appreciate how special this piece of land is.  We didn't have a very windy day, but I imagine that you could have a difficult time dealing with it as the routing moves you around so much.

The holes are framed really well and the framing helps you select a line of play.  It's tough for a first-timer, but Mr. Brown (the member I played with) gave us fantastic advice.  The placement of hazards means you need to take some risk to create good chances for birdies, but that's how it should be.  Many of the greens are subtle, but some (such as 15) are wildly entertaining.

MPCC Shore was a real treat.  I sincerely appreciate having the chance to play it and Bob asking for our opinions. 

[Andy Troeger]

I guess I don't understand exactly why #18 gets so much criticism. Its not a typical 450 yard brute finishing hole and it is somewhat the anti-cllimatic uphill finisher but I think the tee shot is actually pretty good with the bunkers and the little creek left (which I managed to find somehow). Maybe the creek isn't that much in play and I just got unlucky, but its there nontheless. The green I can see not being quite up with some of the others.

In general I really don't see anything at the Shore that I didn't care for to the point of thinking it needed to be changed. You do have long stretches of the routing that go in one direction without turning around but the angles do change slightly (thinking #9-14). Most of the green sites were well thought out, and I especially liked #7 and #9. The opening stretch builds up anticipation for the ocean view holes. I really enjoyed the round and the course as it current exists. I do like Pebble better, but there's no shame in that.

[Tim Bert]

 As I told John Mayhugh and others on the trip, I enjoyed it more than my round at Pebble Beach.  I don't expect that to be the popular opinion, but I thought the round was that much fun.
   

Jon Spaulding said exactly the same thing today (during our round at Harding Park). I haven't played Pebble, but I did walk it during a tournament and I'm inclined to agree with the both of you.

No matter how good of a course MPCC is, it could not compare to the joys of walking down the 18th fairway at Pebble in the sunset.

Let's face it - neither is a terrible option.  I'd choose walking up the 18th fairway at Pebble in the sunset over walking up the 18th fairway at MPCC in the sunset. 

As for playing the Shore in its entirety vs. playing Pebble in its entirety and finishing up Pebble at sunset, I was fortunate enough to do both and I'd take the Shore.  The remarkable thing is that Bob, Huck, and others swear Dunes is even better.

[Tom Huckaby]

I do believe Dunes is the better golf course of the two at MPCC.  It's very close, but on the overall I think Dunes is a slightly better test on top of having the more spectacular and fun holes (9, 10,14 as I see it).  As for preferring MPCC Shore to Pebble Beach, well... if you played the latter taking six hours and waiting on Mrs. Havecamp all day, having paid $500 for the privilege, well then I can understand it.  But try to imagine playing PB a lot cheaper and without waiting on a shot... then compare it golf course for golf course... if you can do this and honestly prefer MPCC Shore, then you are seeing things I sure don't.  I do love the Shore - it's a great, great golf course - but even the late Strantz himself wouldn't call it better than Pebble Beach, I think.  I know Bob Huntley must be chuckling at this comparison.

As for weaknesses at the Shore, well 18 has been beaten to death.  I concur that it is an odd duck, and I too miss the old 18th, which was somewhat of a road hole in that a road (marked OB) came in just a few yards to the right of the green, right up against the clubhouse.  It was a difficult and great hole and yes, the new finish requiring a walk/ride in is odd.  Beyond that, I also miss the old greens, which were fabulous.  I also think that 7, while a great hole for the low capper, is a bit much for the higher marker... there's really no good way for him to play that hole except from the very front tee, which most males won't play.

Interesting I completely disagree with John M. re 17 - that stream makes the golf hole.  It's a tough, interesting and memorable hole with the stream - without it, it's just a tight straight par 4.  I also have no issues with the rocks - good lord, did you really expect them to remove them all?  And they rather make each of the 10th and 11th holes... picture each with no boulders and to me, they lose a lot.

On the whole it's a course with few glaring "weaknesses" I think - although I will be interested to read what Bob says.  There just has to be some fondness for aspects of the old Shore....

TH


ps to Tim Bert - playing the worst muni course with Huntley and his cronies is not a fair fight against Pine freakin' Valley - those rounds are that much fun.  And as for Spaulding, well he must have been still hungover from his Monday round if he made that statement with a straight face.

[JohnV]

It has been a few years since I got to play the Shore (Kings Putter - Stevinson week), but the worst thing about #18 would be if you were playing match play and the match went extra holes.  Having to walk from 18 to 1 would dampen the excitement of that moment.

Can anyone think of a longer walk in from the 18th hole in golf?

[Stan Dodd]

Bob,
Even with the problems of 18 (insurmountable?).  the Shore is just about the most fun golf on the Peninsula.  I relish every opportunity to play there.  I think it is well within the capabilities of the mid handicappler to putt for pars and birdies on most every hole, and that is fun.  Given my choice of courses on teh Peninsula i would choolse the Shore over everyone but CPC.

[rjsimper]

"Can anyone think of a longer 18th hole walk in golf?"

Industry Hills in CA - so long that a Funicular was installed (and never works) so it's a climb of several hundred feet on switchbacks.  Horrible after having gotten your head kicked all day on the golf course.

I've not seen the old 18th at the Shore, but I did feel that on my one play last year that the 18th was a definite weakness...16 and 17 are less spectacular than the preceeding holes, but I don't think this can be avoided given the routing, and they are perfectly fine golf holes in their own right if you remove the ocean-ness of the others from the equation.

Bob, has the long grass around the trees and bunkers been cut back down post Cal Am?  If not, I'd like to see that cut back down as there seemed to be some unnecessarily punishing spots (left of 2, for example).

[Gene Greco]

   


[/quote]

 The remarkable thing is that Bob, Huck, and others swear Dunes is even better.
[/quote]

   Put me in this camp as well.

However, I've also mentioned before that MPCC would be my first choice of clubs to belong and play on an everyday basis. So either course for me is very pleasureable to play.

[Tom Huckaby]

Stan - are we talking reality (the way things are now) or fantasy (the way things are when the chips fall correctly)?

I have to ask given you too seem to prefer MPCC Shore to Pebble Beach, not to mention MPCC Dunes.

Again, the usual situation in terms of expense and crowds would make it tough to call Pebble the best golf experience.  I just wonder how far anyone takes this.  Can you honestly say a round at MPCC Shore would be more fun that a round without the listed negatives at Pebble?

And before you say it can't happen, well... it has... for me, three times at least.

Gene - great call - if there is a better dream club in terms of year-round golf and variety of great golf, I sure can't think of it.  Bob does have the life.

 

[Mike Benham]

My comments on the Shore course are based on what the intended finished product was when MPCC hired Stranz.

If the intent was to build a course that could be enjoyed by all skill levels within the club, that was achieved through the use of multiple tees, wide fairways, accepting of the ground game and reasonable putting surfaces.

I don't understand the complaint about #2 or #17.  There are many holes that can also be defined as not like any other hole on the course (#7 as an example).

As for 18, it might not be the best hole on the course only because it might not fit the original intent of the renovation.  Perhaps Stranz built as a shrine to it's next door neighbor.

I do think that 16 plays too short and that the fairway configuration on #1 is a little odd, a dogleg where one isn't needed ...

[Tom Huckaby]

Mike:  I think the intent of the redesign was to do all the things you say plus improve drainage plus maximize the views - and it's pretty easy to see Strantz succeeded in every respect.  And I concur with all of your comments except (and you had to know that was coming!):

16 - it plays too short for the Spauldings and Nosers and Benhams of the world, but ask Bob if he thinks it plays too short.  It's a rather large carry to make the fairway... something you likely never notice, Mr. 270 Carry If I Heel It.

 

More seriously, I suppose it does play too short to be a par 5 in the highest-levels of competition, but heck, for those just call it a par four.  For us mortals it is pretty darn fun to have a par five we can reach with two good shots.  In all seriousness, I don't recall ever having less than the 2hybrid into that green, and many times it was 3wood or layup.  And remember you call me Sneaky Long.  It's not too short for me.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

Bob,

First off thanks again for hosting us at MPCC, it really was a great treat!!

There has been a lot of discussion on 18 and quite frankly, I'm not sure how to solve it.  I really only see two workarounds to not having a golf hole on that stretch of land. 

Option 1 - Squeeze in an extra hole on the bottom portions of the property and have the course end on 17.  This likely would be very unpopular and obviously leaves a long undesireable walk back to the clubhouse.

Option 2 - Replace the old 18 as it once was and take a long walk up the hill between 17 green and 18 tee.  Also would seem to be undesireable, but at least you get your old 18th hole back. 

On the current 18, with the road at the bottom of the hill and the range at the top of the hill, it doesn't appear to be extendable to be made into a short risk/reward par 5.

As for the rocks, I'm going to have to disagree with John.  I think they fit right in and make a beautiful backdrop to both the 6th and 10th greens.  A quick drive up and down 17 mile drive will reveal several outcropping such as that one, so it doesn't look the least bit out of place to me.

I also thought the re-routing of holes 9-13 was expertly done as the course turns south.  The views afforeded on this stretch are just outstanding.  15 was as absolute gem with the mis-direction off the tee and the approach shot to the skiyline green that tumbled perfectly in line with the rock outcropping to the right of the green.

I too think the hazard right of 17 green works fine...nothing wrong with a long par 4 at the end of the round to test the golfer coming in.

Overall, to my eye, I think Mr. Stranz did a pretty fine job in his stated goal of trying to blend in the course with the natural surrounds as well as make some very interesting and strategic golf holes.

[Forrest Richardson]

I did not play with the group — but I enjoyed the course very much. I think 17 and 18 were weak, but I could not discount the course in anyway due to those holes. The course is truly a fun and exciting venue.

[Stan Dodd]

Tom,
I too have had some pretty sublime experiences with Pebble.  I am just giving my opinion as a girlie hitting hack.
I have had many special special days at MPCC and the total experience ( golf, lunch, drinks and let's play another 18) is just MY preference.
No knock on Pebble, I think it is underrated.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,
I too have had some pretty sublime experiences with Pebble.  I am just giving my opinion as a girlie hitting hack.
I have had many special special days at MPCC and the total experience ( golf, lunch, drinks and let's play another 18) is just MY preference.
No knock on Pebble, I think it is underrated.

Stan - having carried my sorry butt through our match at Pajaro, I sure see you as neither girlie hitting nor hack.   

But I get what you're saying better now, and I can understand that.  Heck, in terms of the overall experience, MPCC - especially when played with friends, and considering multiple rounds - is very very tough to beat.  This goes along with what Gene Greco was saying - if there is a better place to be a member, I sure can't think of it.

But take it Pebble at its experiential best v. MPCC Shore at its experiential best, for one round, and well.... I find it hard to declare MPCC Shore superior.

TH

[Jon Spaulding]

The course is fantastic. For the record, I "prefer" MPCC Shore over Pebble. As much as I enjoy the design of the latter, there is too much ancillary "stuff" going on which degrades the experience IMHO.

After playing on the Shore, I left "questioning" a couple of things; visually, a feast for the senses....how much is enough, and does the Shore exceed the bar?...........playing angles/decisions...an overabundance? This might be a case of "beware what you wish for, it might come true".

While we all long for courses with visual intrigue and a demand on decision making, the Shore packs more in 18 holes than I have seen. These, in combination with the previous evening's events @ Pasa, left me a bit tired at the end of the day. Sometimes a few holes with little or nothing going on provides a nice break from the fireworks.

[Tom Huckaby]

Jon:

Understood.  So it wasn't the hangover.  It's all about the experience... and yes, that can be less than satisfactory at PB.  I too would prefer the average round at MPCC to the average round at PB, as things stand today.  But like I say, make it the best that each can get and to me it's not really that close.  There is only one PB.

And those are good points re the Shore in terms of it being "too much."  I think that's true once one gets past #4 and heads to the ocean... but those first four holes (all pretty darn good, I think) are no overkill... and then the same goes for 17 and 18.... is this more a matter of some apetizers, a sumptious feast, then some after-dinner drinks?

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()