News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Matt_Ward

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #75 on: October 10, 2008, 11:27:37 PM »
Adam:

Doak's statement still rings true -- a mutt is a mutt -- not a pure breed.

Nice try at spinning the story / re: Nicklaus -- give McCain a call to lift his lifeless campaign. You might be able to spin some tales for him as well.

The Bear, in the event you didn't know it -- excelled at hitting a drop dead shot with the softest of fades. The ball landed at the center point of the green and was simply repelled falling off the rear side of the green.

Scratch Nathan's assessment of the hole is right on target. It's one step short of miniature golf because luck, far from skill, is the more important ingredient when playing it.

I also concur with what JES II said -- there are serious gaps when playing Pebble Beach - when a course is seeking to attain a 10 score it needs to demonstrate that no hole(s) take away from the time spent there. His listing of a few holes mentioned is something I agree with. Mind you -- I don't agree with him on the 4thand 17th but the others are spot on in my mind.






Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #76 on: October 10, 2008, 11:29:47 PM »
Matt, Mutts make the best dogs.

Did Jack's ball actually hit the center of the green? If was short of center the down slope from the backside of the fronting bunker would propel ones ball over. Look very closely where it really did land and get back to us.

Anthony, Your "why?" makes no sense to me, please clarify?

Adam,

I thought I knew the course as well as any other, but you hit it right on the head about that particular shot, it hit the down slope over the bunker, so it wasn't the perfect shot, it was a wee bit short.

For God'ssake leave your Thoreau like existence and come and play at some of your old haunts.
We miss you and your phony handicap.

Bob

Anthony Gray

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #77 on: October 11, 2008, 09:09:52 AM »

Anthony, Your "why?" makes no sense to me, please clarify?



 Adam,


I think the new bunker in the left center of the fairway was placed to prevent long hitters from driving the green. Which takes away from the charm of the hole. And the depth of the bunker does not match the others on the course.



Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #78 on: October 11, 2008, 10:41:43 AM »

Doak's statement still rings true -- a mutt is a mutt -- not a pure breed.Clearly your blind following to Doak's bias towards a hole by hole analysis is clouding your judgement.

Nice try at spinning the story / re: Nicklaus -- give McCain a call to lift his lifeless campaign. You might be able to spin some tales for him as well.Please re-read my QUESTION about the shot. It was not spin, and, your attempts at political humor illustrate you do have a future in professional journalism


Anthony, I'm not exactly sure where those new bunkers are located that they would prevent somebody from trying to drive the green. My impression is they are in LZ, NOT near the green or near where someone who would try to drive that green would interface. I'm dubious about people trying to drive the green. Where did you get this notion?
   I do know that the majority of corporate execs who play the course, on shareholders dimes, now have slim to no chance at making a par on the back nine because of those added bunkers. BTW, there was always a bunker well short and right of the green.

Bob, that's very nice of you to say. I miss you too. I'll look for an opportunity to come back to the P. Surely seeing Strantz's work is an imperative.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2008, 10:44:16 AM by Adam Clayman »
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Anthony Gray

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #79 on: October 12, 2008, 12:34:58 PM »
 

  Adam,

Please educate me on why the bunker was needed? My memory is not perfect..too many marriages too many divorces...but I remember stairs into that bunker. I think stairs into a bunker is out of place at PB.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #80 on: October 12, 2008, 02:30:19 PM »
Anthony, Now I'm really lost. Weren't we discussing the bunkers on 15? The new ones added in the last 5 years?

You made a claim they were installed to prevent a try for the green from the tee. I was unaware of stairs. But their placement in the LZ  has little do with someone trying to drive that green. BTW, I'm unaware of ever seeing anyone try that particular strategy.
 
If I know the mindset of the decision makers, they added those bunkers to create a tougher hole. Their mistakes lies in that the hole was perfect as it was with ample width, even with OB on both sides.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #81 on: October 12, 2008, 02:40:06 PM »
The hole in the ownerships head.

Matt_Ward

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #82 on: October 12, 2008, 11:26:07 PM »
Adam, et al / re: 12th hole at PB:

Adam, since you stated Jack's ball hit the back end of the frontal bunker and only as a result of that did the ball indeed go over the green -- I 've enclosed below the review of the '72 US Open by known other than Dan Jenkins writing for SI.

Be sure to send me your mea culpa on who has the better understanding of what happened that final round day at the 12th hole at PB when Nicklaus hit his tee shot there.

One other thing Rich G's previous statement, "Any pro or elite player who cannot hit a 200-yard high cut should get on this web site and whinge, as it is probably that he or she really can't play golf." Yeah, I guess Jack can't play golf.

My point then -- and now -- is the 12th is often doctored to do the things it does. Reject good shots when hit and provide no real distinction between the good, not so good and the terrible.

* * *

June 26, 1972 issue of SI

" ... It was then at the 12th hole, a par-3, that Nicklaus demonstrated his relentless courage. He hit what he thought was a perfect three-iron right at the flag. It struck the green 10 feet in front of the hole but simply zoomed past it, and then bore relentlessly down a steep slope and out of sight in thick ground cover.

As Jack walked onto the 12th green, he scowled at P.J. Boatwright Jr., the USGA's executive director who was refereeing, and said, "What'd you do with all the grass?"

Nicklaus was referring to the fact that on top of everything else that makes Pebble Beach so dangerous, the USGA, for the final round, had seen fit to roll and triple-cut the small, wind-dried greens, making them next-to-impossible to hold or putt.

Later Jack would say, "I went to bed Saturday night thinking I had to shoot at least 70 to win. But this morning when I saw the first green and the wind, I knew it would be a tough son of a gun and I'd have to have patience,"

Nicklaus found his ball in a dreadful lie on the 12th. He gouged at it, moving slightly up the hill. He gouged again and sent it eight feet past the cup. That left him with a super character-builder, as they call it, to avoid another double bogey that might destroy his confidence totally. And although he could not know it, he was in danger of losing his lead altogether. At this moment two holes ahead, Palmer was lining up a makeable birdie putt which, combined with a Nicklaus miss on 12, would put Arnold a stroke ahead. As Palmer said later: "It certainly would have given me a more personal interest in the Open."

Indeed, this had been an extraordinary Open for Palmer. He began it with three straight bogeys and a 77, but exploded back into contention on Friday with a magnificent 68, a score nobody bettered in the tournament. A 73 on Saturday kept him two strokes behind Nicklaus.

For a while on Sunday it seemed possible that Palmer might catch his old rival. On the 1st hole, to shouts of "Go Arnie," he hit his approach seven feet from the flag. Thunderous cheers. Then he left the putt short. Short. Thunderous groan. He missed another birdie putt on two, but rolled in a 40-footer on the third, which put him just one stroke back. After that it was a struggle -- he made no more birdies and finished with a 76 -- but then everyone was struggling out there, Nicklaus included, so that if Palmer could just sink his birdie put on the 14th. ... It didn't happen. Palmer missed. And Nicklaus did not miss ..."


Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #83 on: October 13, 2008, 12:39:29 AM »
Quote
Adam, since you stated Jack's ball hit the back end of the frontal bunker and only as a result of that did the ball indeed go over the green -

Please show me where I stated that?

But, if you think "ten feet in front of the hole" is evidence you can send me your law degree. I suppose this qualifies as exhibit B? "He hit what he thought was a perfect three-iron right at the flag."


Now, how deep is the left 3/4's of that green? Which way was the wind blowing? Do you know any of that? Are you even aware of how the wind affects that hole? "Well do ya Punk?"

Let's examine Jack's idea of a perfect shot, shall we? He hit it right at the flag to a narrow green with rock hard conditions. Seems like pretty bad course management to me. Unless the preceding holes were all much softer and only the 12th was tricked up with the firmness? Yeah right!

« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 12:43:34 AM by Adam Clayman »
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #84 on: October 13, 2008, 01:04:48 AM »
12 very well may be a par 3 green that most mortals don't dare try to shoot at from the tips.  But using this same logic, isn't #5 at PV also a hole that fits the same criteria?  Is its a lesser hole because most can't hit it on the green in regulation?

So as has been said here before, who ever said that going for the green in regulation on a par 3 is the proper play?


Matt_Ward

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #85 on: October 13, 2008, 06:57:00 AM »
Adam:

Hello -- anybody home.

I'm plenty aware of the 12th hole (played the course no less than half a dozen times) -- the nature of how it plays -- wind elements that matter when playing it, angle of attacks, -- etc, etc, etc.

It's OK to admit error -- most people can do that but there are some -- hint / hint, when caught a little bit short on the memory department have to hunker down with the end-run BS to escape the fact that their collective memory is a bit off shall we say.

Here's what you said verbatim, "Did Jack's ball actually hit the center of the green? If was short of center the down slope from the backside of the fronting bunker would propel ones ball over. Look very closely where it really did land and get back to us."

Again, my memory is quite vivid of that moment in time.

The pin was in the center rear portion of the green (not tucked tight to the left) and Jack's approach was well played as Jenkins alludes to in his summary recap for SI. Your statement was to throw forward an erroneous conclusion about "if" the ball was short (which it wasn't) then that would be the catalyst for the ball to go over. Wrongo buckeroo. I did "look closely" at where the ball landed -- my memory of such shots is quite good and Jenkins account only solidifies that side of my recollection.

There was nothing wrong with Jack's shot -- it was well played and let's be clear in case you and other forget -- Jack's uncanny ability to hit drop dead high cut fades with long irons is without question one of his strongest suits -- quite possibly the finest ever in all of golf.

Let me point out that greens in '72 were quite varied in their overall firmness -- some were reasonably firm, others less so and then there were others like concrete. Check the tape -- as I have again -- to see how Jack's 1-iron came down at the 71st hole for his kick-in birdie -- the ball was hit a mile high and he was able to nestle it closely in such a tight pin placement on the far left side of the green. Inconsistency was much in play that day with the greens varying from one to the next and even from moment to moment with different groups.

Adam -- you said, "... get back to us ...", well, I have -- please feel free to take the most convenient towel and wipe the egg off of your face.


Kalen:

When a player makes the perfect shot and you get silly bounces to the point where no shot of any type can be played then you don't have golf you have gotcha.

The 12th - if properly set-up can and does hold approach shots. Jack's that day should have received a far greater reward than it did.

I don't expect greens to be receptive to just any shot but if you saw / watched the shot Jack played that day his reaction and the resulting scowl to P.J. Boatwright spoke volumes.

You ask about the 5th at PV and the 12th at PB -- two completely different holes. I never said one must play a par-3 via the aerial route alone -- but Jack's shot that final round day in '72 was more than sufficient to have been air-tight.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #86 on: October 13, 2008, 09:11:43 AM »
I capitulate. All I did was ask.  But clearly air tight his shot was not.   
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Anthony Gray

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #87 on: October 13, 2008, 10:04:16 AM »
Anthony, Now I'm really lost. Weren't we discussing the bunkers on 15? The new ones added in the last 5 years?

 I was unaware of stairs. 


  Adam,

 I called this morning. The bunker does have stairs. It is like Sesame Street "which one of these is not like the others".



Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #88 on: October 13, 2008, 11:29:21 AM »
Matt,

Pebble Beach is not set up every day like it is for the fourth round of a US Open.  Being that Jack was perhaps the greatest player ever, even he should have understood this and gone for the gap in fron right of the green.  You can take a whole lot of greens and call them unfair when they are triple cut and you are hitting a 3-iron to them.  Your basis for why the hole is bad, or weak, or whatever, seems off.  Using the final round of a US Open to interpret how a hole plays is definately the wrong way to go about critiquing...

Also, the shot to 17 did not nestle down, it hit the pin and that was why it stopped.  Do you honestly think a 1-iron, even one hit high and soft by Jack Nicklaus, would simply nestle down from 220 yards on greens that firm!?  This is not to say that it wasn't a great shot but again your basis for comparison is just off to me.  Jack's shot on 17 had nothing to do with his shot on 12 anyways.

The 12th is a good golf hole.  Not every hole is supposed to be a birdie hole, and this is such a hole.  If you can get over your ego and simply play to the front right, through the gap, then you have more then a legitimate chance to hit the green and make par.  Nobody said golf was supposed to be easy...the 12th is a pure test to see how good you can really hit the ball, and how well you are thinking.  Why it certainly is not the greatest par-3 in the world, it is not weak by any standards.

Jordan
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 11:31:42 AM by Jordan Wall »

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #89 on: October 13, 2008, 01:08:15 PM »
Jordan,

I hope you are not on some aging medication because your remarks on the holes in question are sage indeed.

Bob

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #90 on: October 13, 2008, 01:11:43 PM »
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Ian Andrew

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #91 on: October 13, 2008, 04:26:16 PM »
It's a great course no matter how you try to measure it - but it is not perfect.  I've criticized a few of the holes before, but I don’t see the merit of doing so this time.

I spend a lot of time deciding how much I think of a course by how much of the architecture that I break down. I tend to make notes for future use. Some courses like Merion and Pinehurst have an enormous amount of notes for every hole. I have lots of notes on Pebble - but there are also a lot of holes where I have nothing that I wanted to borrow. That doesn’t mean that they don’t have merit to you – but it does mean that they don’t have merit to me. The one fascinating thing about making notes is occasionally they are about what I didn’t like and lead to suggestions of what I want to avoid.

Pebble has a couple of holes that don’t do it for me – no matter how truly sublimes half the holes are – the flaws are too great to give them a 10. No matter how much I’m in love with Royal County Down and would likely select it as my favourite place I have ever played – I have to do the same there too.


Tom Huckaby

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #92 on: October 13, 2008, 04:29:05 PM »
Ian - that's good stuff, very understandable.

I just have to ask though - when you say you can't give these a 10, on what scale do you mean?

A course with flaws can still be a 10 on the Doak scale - as per previous discussions in which the man himself clarified the definition.  If it cannot be such on one's own personal scale, that's just fine.

TH

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #93 on: October 13, 2008, 04:53:03 PM »
Ian,

While I understand you analysis, is there a golf course where every hole is a perfect 10 ?

I doubt it.

It's the macro evaluation that categorizes a course rating, not a macro evaluation with micro demerits.

To expect perfection from every hole is to create a standard which might be impossible to achieve.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #94 on: October 13, 2008, 05:01:36 PM »
Further to Pat's post - and there do remain times when agreeing with him is a good thing  ;) - is perfection of each hole even a worthwhile goal to which to strive?

Isn't there something to be said for ebb and flow, and breather holes?

Man, I can't think of a course where that occurs more perfectly (to overuse a word) than Pebble Beach.  That combined with the presence of some many fantastic golf holes is why I can see it getting a Doak 10.  It gets a Huckaby 10 without question - but I don't have to create a definition for that.

TH
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 05:08:59 PM by Tom Huckaby »

Ian Andrew

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #95 on: October 13, 2008, 07:10:12 PM »
Ian,

While I understand you analysis, is there a golf course where every hole is a perfect 10 ?

I doubt it.

It's the macro evaluation that categorizes a course rating, not a macro evaluation with micro demerits.

To expect perfection from every hole is to create a standard which might be impossible to achieve.

Pat and Tom,

My view of a course that is a ten does not involve perfection - but each hole must offer something thought provoking in the architecture or manages to continue the story that was begun on the very first hole (Merion to me is like a play – remove one piece and the entire story does not get told).

An example that is very controversial on this site is Pinehurst. The site is average, the aesthetic is lacking, but somehow the course adds up to far greater than the sum of its parts. Each hole offers a riddle. Each hole can be broken down to indicate the opportunities and pitfalls that exist just because of the architecture in and around the greens. Each hole is interesting and once again works together as a wonderful whole. Different pins bring out different moods and new problems to be understood and figured out. Pinehurst is a 10 to me – yet its marginal looking and none of the holes are one that I would put on my personal top 18 holes.

Pebble Beach has multiple holes that are worthy of anyone’s list of great holes. The overall experience is a must regardless of cost. The architecture, the setting, the ocean side holes, even the smell makes it one of the greatest experiences you can find on any golf course. The problem lies in a couple of interior holes – and yes one I could excuse – that just don’t add anything special to the experience. They are connectors to the next great place on the property.

You may find this odd - but I wouldn’t change any of them under any circumstance. I like the course the way it is. But it is not perfect - or even close enough to remain a 10 - and I don’t think a 9 is an insult to any course.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #96 on: October 13, 2008, 09:51:45 PM »
Ian:

That's great, but you completely missed my point.

See, as I said, both in the Doak definition and in my own personal way of looking at things, again, a course does not require perfection to merit a 10.  So when you say:

But it is not perfect - or even close enough to remain a 10 - and I don’t think a 9 is an insult to any course.

That is where you lose me.

I fully acknowledge Pebble's imperfections.  I also see it as a rather iron-clad 10.

And I also fully understand that you do not.  To each his own.  But that was not my point in posting to you, not really; my point was to try to gain an understanding of your take.

And I still don't fully understand you.  You had me until that last sentence.

So let's try again:  does a 10 require perfection or not?  It seems to me you require that.  But please do clarify.

TH

ps - I fully agree a 9 is a great score for a golf course, and I would absolutely understand people giving Pebble a 9.  My comments to you are more GENERAL, not about Pebble specifically.  That is, what do your require in a 10?

Matt_Ward

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #97 on: October 13, 2008, 10:16:56 PM »
Jordan:

A few rebuttals are in order ...

I never opined that PB is set-up every day like is it the fourth round of a US Open. Be sure to read what Rich G wrote and what my response to him was in regards to.

Once you do that you'll have a much better understanding how my specific participation came about.

The situation with the 12th was not an error on Jack's part -- it was because of the base inconsistency of the greens themselves that final day. Some held -- others did not.

The basis for my conclusion is not somethign I alone share. Tom Doak has said as much - ditto others. The issue is whether the non-ocean holes at PB really ADD anything of substance to the totality of time when playing the course. I see them as being an anchor around the neck fo the course.

Before all the left field boos ring upon me -- let me point out that I'm still of the belief that PB is a superb layout and that I would dare it falls anywhere from 8-9 depending upon the conditions which can vary with the time of year when there.

Let me refresh your memory on the 17th -- the ball was already nearing the end of its flight -- when it hit the front portion of the green and simply grazed the flagstick. You make it sound like the ball hit the stick on the fly and luckily stayed on the green. Not so.

My "comparison" is not off to me -- your understanding of what I have communicated may need some attention on your part. My point on mentioning the 17th, in the event you missed it, was to highlight the general inconsistency of how the greens were holding that day. The shot Nicklaus hit at #12 was well played and literally BOUNCED like a super-ball on the concrete-green. It was a contrivance on the part of the USGA and the Nicklaus scowl at Boatwright was well done on the Bear's part. The shot on #17 was even longer but it faced a green that was more receptive even when one factors in the more demanding placement and the shortage of green space to land the shot.

You say the 12th is a good golf hole. How so? What makes it unique -- when you size up all the other par-3 holes at PB the 12th is dead last - not even close when 5,7 and 17 are calculated into the picture.

The 12th is merely a bystander when overall greatness at PB is really analyzed. You sarcastically throw forward the inane idea that people should "get over your ego" -- that's not the issue Jordan -- the issue is whether the hole adds anything of note to the time when playing PB. I don't see that it does and you'll likely say otherwise. So be it.

One other thing please don't lecture to me about how golf isn't "suppose to be easy. Really? I never knew that. You also say it's not weak "by any standards" -- again -- really? My standards are certainly different than yours. I see PB as two-act play -- the ocean holes are outstanding and I have opined -- for those who love PB but never mentioned this fact that I have said -- the combo of the 6th, 7th and 8th may be the best par-5, Par-3 and Par-4 mix within a three-hole stretch than just about any other in the world. So before the barking takes place that Ward doesn't get it -- I have saluted PB in any number of ways but when a course merits a ten it needs to be as nearly air tight as possible. PB, in my mind, has some holes where the oxygen of greatness leaks out.

Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #98 on: October 13, 2008, 10:45:03 PM »
Matt,

Whether or not the greens were consistent or not has nothing to do whatsoever with the quality of the hole.

Your basis for it being the worst par-3 on the course, while true, is not a good one to back up the hole being a weak one.  The three other par-3's are all world class and it would thus be hard for any hole to compare against them.  The 12th presents its own dilemnas, and while perhaps not equal to those of the other par-3's, it is nonetheless original and solid in it's own right.  I do not deny it to be one of the weaker holes on the course; however, that does not make it a bad hole.

I disagree that the non-ocean holes do not add substance to the course.  What is not world class about #'s 13, 14, and 16?  The holes are all great, my personal favorite being the 16th.  That is a lot of superb holes on for a course which you state has little substance on holes away from the ocean.  I also like #2 a lot more then others, but that is perhaps more personal preference to whether the hole is actually great or not.  Not to mention, #11 is also a really good hole, and earlier I explained why I believe so.

I am not opposed to agreeing to disagree - you are Matt Ward and I am not going to sway your opinion one way or another.  However, just because Tom Doak stated something about a hole, or just because something happened 35 years ago in a US Open, does not define a hole or a course.  I frankly dont care what happened way back then in regards to the golf course, because the tournament and golf course are completely different.  And, that is no disrespect to Mr. Doak, but his opinion of the hole(s) is just that, an opinion, just like yours and mine, and one person's opinion will not sway mine.

Hopefully you can actually think about the hole rather then use other opinions and past tournaments to define your opinion of it.  The hole can be played two ways - run it through the gap or take the risk to carry the bunker, knowing a perfect shot is needed.  The bunkering is good and defines the shot you have to hit from the tee.  The recovery options after a bad shot are also fun and varied, which is a good thing.  All that combines to make a good hole.

Jordan 
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 10:47:04 PM by Jordan Wall »

Ian Andrew

Re: Weak holes at Pebble Beach
« Reply #99 on: October 13, 2008, 11:49:28 PM »
Tom,

There isn't a perfect course in the world. There's always something that you come to question in even the most clever of courses.

For example Merion has 3 par threes in the same direction despite being virtually flawless as a course. I still think it's a 10 - but three threes in a row in the same direction is not ideal.

You can find some fault or weakness with any great course. Pebble has more than  a few and more than the other courses which are a 10 on Tom D's list.