News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Ross Waldorf

One More Pasatiempo Thread
« on: March 08, 2009, 02:54:09 PM »
At the risk of beating one of the acknowledged GCA dead horses, I just got back from a trip that included a round at Pasatiempo and I wanted to make a few comments.

I've always loved the course, first of all. But I really wanted to throw some kudos to Tom Doak, Renaissance and the membership for the really wonderful restoration job they've done there. I hadn't played the course since any of the most recent round of changes had been made, so it was kind of a new experience. Aside from the usual suspects -- the bunker work on 3, 5, 16 and 18 (all terrific); and the great newly redone green on 11 -- the thing that really blew my mind was how fantastic 17 has become with the newly extended green. Just a great change, and one that makes you appreciate what a good hole that actually is. It no longer feels like the weak hole on the back nine.

Finally, if everybody's bored of talking about Pasatiempo, I thought one thing that might stimulate a bit of discussion would be 14. I have this feeling when I play that hole that if I were a member, it might turn out to be my favorite hole on the course just because it's so perplexing. I'm never quite sure what the hell I'm supposed to do there, and I mean that as the highest of compliments. The swale that runs through the fairway is so interesting -- and for a player like me (not a particularly long hitter -- 230-250 type driver) it's just such a puzzle where you want to play that tee shot. My unintended choice this time -- way left behind a tree -- clearly not optimal. But the way the fairway is contoured seems to suggest a shot out to the right to avoid the blind approach from down in the swale, yet the green is oriented more for a shot in from the left. That doesn't make sense if you're coming from the "Oh I get it -- challenge the (scary feature) and get a better angle of approach" school of golf architecture. Which is what makes it so cool, of course. What a great hole.

Look forward to another trip up north to play there again sometime.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2009, 03:43:55 PM »
I think Pasatiempo would be an excellent Walker Cup venue (I've said that before on GCA, if that matters).

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2009, 03:52:06 PM »
Ross -

Yes, 14 is an understated hole and the premium is on the drive.  I think the work done to recover some of the original green area, demands that your drive favors the left side, even more so when the hole location is in the back right location.  The contours of the green encourage an approach from the left that can move to the back hole location.

Mike
"... and I liked the guy ..."

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2009, 04:00:11 PM »
Ross,
   You can never say too much about Pasatiempo, it is one great golf course. As you pointed out the Renaissance team just made it even better with their work. Great call on #17, who would have ever thought you could make that hole that much better?
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2009, 04:29:13 PM »
Ed,

Yeah -- I totally agree. I thought it was as if a new hole had been put where the old 17th was. The depth and shape of the green really change the way you approach the hole. And the change to the 11th green is also superb -- that's another place where the changes really improve the way the hole plays, not just the appearance. I decided to play the whites this time, because I thought it'd be more fun for me, and 11 has to be the longest 379 yard hole in the history of the world!

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2009, 06:17:59 PM »
I agree with Mike Benham that the green favors a drive to the left side, but isn't most of the left half of the fairway in the swale?  Over the course of perhaps 50 rounds, I have generally tried to play it down the right side, short of the swale, but now I'm not so sure.  A typical approach club from the swale seems to be about a 6-iron, and I've never had trouble getting the ball airborne out of the swale.  I can't remember whether you can see the taregt from the swale.

Can you hit it left, be in the fairway, but not in the swale?

The green is easily the flattest on the course.

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2009, 08:15:09 PM »
John's post really illustrates the beauty of the hole. You've played it many more times that I have, John, and the fact that you're asking if it's possible to be in the left half of the fairway but not in the swale is illustrative of the complexity of the hole. My limited experience there says that if you want to be left but not in the swale, you need to keep it somewhat short -- for me trying to get past it on the left is a no-can-do -- too far for my swing. And I think it's blind from the bottom of the swale, although perhaps that depends on what part if it you find yourself in. The thing that makes it tough for me is that I don't spin the ball much. So if you're right, you're coming into a long narrow green from the narrow side (for those who don't know the hole, the green goes short left to long right on a diagonal), so there's not much room to stop the ball. I'm sure it plays differently for lower handicap golfers who have more backspin, but I still imagine the counter-intuitive nature of the design can really play some tricks on you. But again, the thing that's so cool about the hole is that's it's kind of an oddball. Not the kind of thing you'd figure to see on most post-1950s designs.

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2009, 08:23:11 PM »
The other complexity, as least for me, is the risk involved trying to hit the right half of the fairway.  A pushed or sliced tee shot can go out of bounds, or get blocked by an oak tree.

Although a high soft shot works wonders here, as well as almost anywhere, the left side of the green is open enough to accept a run-up shot.

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2009, 08:57:23 PM »
John,

You know I just played there and I guess I'd forgotten already about the left side -- it does open up a bit there, doesn't it? So you can sneak one on that way with a run up. Which is another cool thing, since it makes for an interesting choice for the no backspin player facing a middle or back pin -- do I go for the safe shot left and putt from there, or do I try the higher-risk play farther back on the green . . . ?

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #9 on: March 08, 2009, 09:17:10 PM »
You might argue that the hole's strategy is entirely dictated by the shape of the green and the positioning (front right) of the greenside bunkers.  Is the left side better, regardless of swales and visbility issues?  I'm not sure.  If you hit it into the swale, you may get an uphill lie for your second shot, which is awful.

I can't justify laying back short of the swale.  It's too far from the green, maybe 190-200 yards back.

Here's an oddity for you.  I average very close to one post per day.   This is my 2008th post on my 2008th day as a GCA member.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2009, 09:18:53 PM by John Kirk »

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #10 on: March 08, 2009, 09:28:47 PM »
So I only have what, 1980 post to catch up to you! Nice to chat online, by the way, John -- you may remember running into me on the patio above the 18th green at Pacific Dunes one afternoon about 5 years ago. You noticed my Rustic Canyon bag tag and said hello and mentioned Golf Club Atlas. I said I was a lurker, which continued until about two months ago. So I finally made it. Hope to run into you again sometime.

As for Pasa's 14th -- yes, short of the swale left really doesn't make much sense because of the distance to the green. Angle is one thing, but 200 yards kind of negates the advantage, I'd say. Then there's the blindness factor to consider, especially since the swale is big enough to tend to collect lots of the shots that go into it. It's just such an interesting contour to contend with.

David_Elvins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #11 on: March 08, 2009, 10:49:52 PM »
14th looking back to the tee.

Ask not what GolfClubAtlas can do for you; ask what you can do for GolfClubAtlas.

Art Roselle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2009, 08:43:54 AM »
If you really like the course and have $2.6mm lying around, the original clubhouse is for sale.  Someone forwarded me a random email with the sale specs (I guess the economy is tough when Santa Cruz real estate solicitations are making it to Charlotte, NC).

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2009, 08:49:36 AM »
I was very recently in northern California making a tour of the most famous courses there. Of all the courses I visited during this trip, it was Pasatiempo that really stands out in my mind. I was aware it was a good course, but Pasatiempo greatly exceeded my expectation.
jeffmingay.com

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2009, 10:29:11 AM »
David, thanks for the picture...such an odd obstacle!

Ross,  I do remember our encounter, though as I get older, I have a terrible time remembering names, unless she is very pretty.  Welcome to the club, and nice call on #14.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2009, 11:44:52 AM »
I have never worried about driving down into the swale  because balls always wind up down in the bottom and the iron shot isn't that hard to get headed in the right direction.  I've never seen a ball stay on one the of the slopes.  The angle into the green is a whole lot better than anything from the right side.

Mackenzie was really good at making a green side bunker determine how you play a hole from tee to green.  #7 at the Valley Club is another very good example.  There the green slopes front to back and right to left, so an approach from the right side of the fairway over the big green side bunker will invariably wind up in the back left corner or worse.

#14 at Pasa just adds the swale for spice!

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2009, 12:17:59 PM »
That photo really does the trick for anyone who hasn't seen the hole. Isn't that just the funkiest fairway contour? The fact that it's kind of random really makes it so much more interesting. Bill's strategy does make lots of sense, in that the fairway cut is tight so it would seem pretty improbable for many balls to stop on the slope. But I think John intimated that it can happen occasionally. Mostly what you get down there is the blindness factor.

As for Jeff's comment, I can really understand that. I've played Pasatiempo three times now, and it just continues to get better in my mind every time. There's something intangible about how it all fits together so wonderfully, but it has a really special feeling. Part of it for me is the intimacy -- it isn't anything like a Bethpage Black every-hole-is-its-own-experience type of course -- it's quite the opposite. It's very tightly tucked into the property. But that isn't a negative for me at all, other than the obvious 6 and 7 problem. Those two holes take me out of the flow because of the artificially added trees, but it just can't be helped with today's game. And neither is a bad hole at all, in fact both have many intriguing features, but I certainly do long for a time machine when I get on the 6th tee (actually, I find that shot sort of cool, although really scary looking -- it's proabably from the second shot on 6 through the tee shot on 7 that the course is most compromised).

Tom Doak put it really well in his book on MacKenzie, I think. Doak talks about the way MacKenzie routed the back nine around the natural features, and how brilliantly he uses them in different ways. The uphill and downhill variations, and the way the various barrancas thread through the holes, all in such a compact space. It's really sensational. And the pieces fit together so beautifully.

Here's an example I love: You walk off the aforementioned 14th green, and the tee for 15 sits just right behind it. You turn to the left and there's this lovely little par 3 tucked into a pocket of the property between 13, 14 and 16 tee. That hole is a real gem. Then you walk off that green and have the fabulous view from 16 tee up the steep hill, which can be a bit startling, followed by what I'd call one of the greatest reveals in my golfing experience -- the view of the 16th green as it comes into view while you walk up the hill in the fairway. As I said to a playing partner this last time around who'd never seen the course: "well, that's not something you see every day." If you've never seen the 16th green at Pasatiempo in person, all I can say is that if it was built today, at least half the people who played it would demand a windmill and start screaming "unfair" at the top of their lungs, and bitch and moan for an hour. I might say the same thing about a steady diet of such greens, but this one has to be one of the greatest things I've ever seen on a golf course.

Whoops. I babble. Nice place, that Pasatiempo.

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2009, 12:44:36 PM »
There can never be too may Pasa threads! :)


I remember in conversations with TN about 14 that he felt the hole was inspired by the 14th at TOC. His comments were the drop off is like the drop off at the 14th at the Old Course. It blinds you from the green. Obviously the 14th at the Old Course is a par 5, whereas the 14th at Pasa is a par 4. Its the FEATURE that was copied, or expounded on. If you play the 14th on the Old Course, you have two distinct options, play it over the Beardies and down the Sawtooth. (the embankment) and then its a blind second which brings Hell into play. The other way is playing it straight into the Elysian Fields, which is safe and moving with a huge patch of gorse that partially blinds you from Hell. Its a risky shot to go for it in two, but you can play it out to the far right near the 15th tee and you can literally putt it in from there--and then three or four putt. With Pasa, playing from down the embankment is the preferred line IMO. Playing from down there has never really bothered me. I'm amazed that it has never been filled by members/another arch as it can be easily misunderstood. It's a wonderful natural feature that was utilized brilliantly by AM and it's one of my favorite holes on the course. And with the work done on 17, is there a better back nine?
'
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2009, 02:12:04 PM »
David,

I so envy you guys who can talk about the Old Course with such familiarity. Ah, one of these days . . . Definitely enjoyed your analysis, and yes -- it is amazing and a credit to the membership that nobody screwed up that fairway because it is such a counter-intuitive feature. As for a better back nine -- with my more limited experience than some on this board, I can't think of one. People always comment about the par 3 finish. To me, one of the most brilliant things about Pasa is that I can't imagine a better way to finish that nine than the existing 18th. With the redone bunkering, that's an absolutely great place to stand and take your final (we hope) swing of the day.

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2009, 09:01:41 PM »
Ross,

Great topic and welcome aboard. I played with Ross at Rustic Canyon and I am convinced he will make a great addition to GCA; he does truely love and understand golf course architecture. Hopefully I helped nudge him out of lurker status. :D

I would definetly agree with John that right is not good and laying up on 14 makes no sense. I usually try to get into the left hand portion of the swale that actually runs towards the green. The shot may be blind but it is much easier to get a mid iron airborne from there as opposed to the portion in the middle of the fairway which is perpendicular to the line of play. I'm not long enough to actually run the ball through the swale to catch the level ground on the far side; is this possible for longer hitters, or does the upslope prevent this? I'd never heard of the hole trying to copy 14 at TOC, but David's explanation makes perfect sense. Again, The Good Dr. provides options for the shorter hitter; he's never happy only giving the best players a challange. This Tommy N guy seems to know a little something about gca; maybe we should try to get him on here. ;)

I'm also a bit puzzled by the low ranking this course receives; granted it has climbed steadily over the last 20 years, but is still ranked way too low in my eyes. Is it the fact that it only adds up to 6500 yards? It certainly plays longer than that and has some of the most unique holes on the planet. The only real negative is the constriction caused by the tree planting on the front 9; is this enough to keep Pasa in the lower 50?
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #20 on: March 09, 2009, 10:23:37 PM »
Ross,

Great topic and welcome aboard. I played with Ross at Rustic Canyon and I am convinced he will make a great addition to GCA; he does truely love and understand golf course architecture. Hopefully I helped nudge him out of lurker status. :D

I would definetly agree with John that right is not good and laying up on 14 makes no sense. I usually try to get into the left hand portion of the swale that actually runs towards the green. The shot may be blind but it is much easier to get a mid iron airborne from there as opposed to the portion in the middle of the fairway which is perpendicular to the line of play. I'm not long enough to actually run the ball through the swale to catch the level ground on the far side; is this possible for longer hitters, or does the upslope prevent this? I'd never heard of the hole trying to copy 14 at TOC, but David's explanation makes perfect sense. Again, The Good Dr. provides options for the shorter hitter; he's never happy only giving the best players a challange. This Tommy N guy seems to know a little something about gca; maybe we should try to get him on here. ;)

I'm also a bit puzzled by the low ranking this course receives; granted it has climbed steadily over the last 20 years, but is still ranked way too low in my eyes. Is it the fact that it only adds up to 6500 yards? It certainly plays longer than that and has some of the most unique holes on the planet. The only real negative is the constriction caused by the tree planting on the front 9; is this enough to keep Pasa in the lower 50?


Pete, I agree. I've been lucky enough to play a few great courses in the last couple of years and Pasa still holds sway with me. I think it's, and it sounds crazy to say here, underrated.
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #21 on: March 10, 2009, 03:10:21 AM »
Hey, Pete!

Yes, you finally gave me the necessary nudge. I never would have taken the plunge if we hadn't had that nice afternoon at Rustic Canyon. Look forward to seeing you at KP.

And to both you and David, I agree about the underrated thing, although I haven't seen enough of the top 50 to really have an informed opinion. Could it be that the course is a bit too subtle for many people? Granted there are some wild and extravagant features, like the 16th green. But even though there is quite a bit of really striking bunkering now that Doak and company are finished working on the restoration, a lot of what makes the place so great is pretty understated -- there's just something intangible about how it all fits together so beautifully.

And I do think that the 6 and 7 problem interferes with the feel of the round in that I tend to get all claustrophobic through there and need a hole or two to shake it off. So while you're getting all wiggy about trying not to hit your second shot on 6 into somebody's living room, you might have forgotten how good the first 5 holes were. I also think that the rating powers that be might not love that par 3 finish. I dunno . . .

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #22 on: March 10, 2009, 05:39:11 AM »
Yes, this hole and another with a severe dip down the left side of the fairway with a green backing to a road (and a dopey raised rear bunker) were the two which really stood out on a pic tour someone posted here a maybe 3-4 months ago.  Who's thread was that as I can't recall and it wasn't saved on Art Fuller's site?  Anyway, I love this sort of feature especially as I think there is some very clever bunkering up short of the green which artfully disguises some dead ground.  Do folks drive into this swale and how awkward is it to get out?  This to me is where architecture really shines.  Seemingly innocent features that can pose little niggling problems, but aren't so awful that guys won't take them on.  I would really like to see the pix forma few months back - anybody remember it?


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield & Alnmouth,

John Mayhugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #23 on: March 10, 2009, 01:20:20 PM »
Anyway, I love this sort of feature especially as I think there is some very clever bunkering up short of the green which artfully disguises some dead ground.  Do folks drive into this swale and how awkward is it to get out?  This to me is where architecture really shines.  Seemingly innocent features that can pose little niggling problems, but aren't so awful that guys won't take them on. 

Sean,
Here's my lie on the 14th from last year's KP.  I think I hit 7 or 8 iron out of it with no real difficulty (at least no more than any other iron shot  ;D) other than just a lack of comfort with the shot.  It does feel awkward but I love the feature.  It would seem that the desire to avoid it creates more problems than just dealing with it.



Ross Waldorf

Re: One More Pasatiempo Thread
« Reply #24 on: March 10, 2009, 01:43:42 PM »
I love what John said -- that trying to avoid the swale is the real problem. I think that's such a brilliant kind of architectural feature. Like Sean said about posing little niggling problems. You stand on the tee and your head gets filled with lots of irrelevant "what's this thing out there in the fairway that I have to deal with" stuff, and now MacKenzie has you where he wants you, doesn't he? You're in your head trying to figure stuff out, when you need to try to hit a good drive and just go deal with the next shot when the ball stops rolling and you walk up to it.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back