next »

[Patrick_Mucci]

the ultimate tribute to the Biarritz concept ?

Is there a better natural setting for a Biarritz in all of America ?

Did Raynor's design have a Biarritz on that site ?

Would it not be the absolute, ideal Biarritz in all the world ?

The equivalent of the 4th at NGLA and the ultimate Redan ?

[David Stamm]

We don't know what Raynor had in mind, and the present greensite may not have been even considered for hole at all, yet alone a par 3.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Patrick, you probably know that on "The original Biarritz (France)" thread, George Bahto said

"So just as a reminder of the general concept of this hole, it was played from the 80' cliff, over about 155-160 yards of the Bay of Biscay to a 50' cliff beyond." 

He also said that he hadn't discovered any pictures of the green.

Aside from the elevation change, isn't that about what the 16th at Cypress is?  Are you saying the hole should have been shorter?  I'm sure you'll tell me if my questions demonstrate that your questions are over my head...

[Jordan Wall]

Pat,

I don't believe so.

Having never played a true biarritz, I know that there are still many around the world of golf.

Being the case, I like how one of a kind the sixteenth hole at Cypress is.  Though perhaps an ideal spot for the ultimate biarritz, the hole would lose it's originailty if it was a template hole.

I consider the hole perfect.  Have you ever played a better par-3?  Have you ever played a better hole?

Besides the fact the site would allow for the ultimate biarritz, do you really believe it would make the hole better than it is now?

I don't believe having the sixteenth at Cypress as a template would improve the hole, even if it was the best biarritz in the world.

[V. Kmetz]

All,

In advance I apologize for I have little scholarship or research investment in Cypress Point; I've never played it and since it went off the Crosby rota, there's little opportunity to see or hear much about the conduct of play there - though various articles, interviews and discussion points from the GCA bounty are helping me along...

My contribution or inquiry to this discussion:

1.  I know I have read somewhere that there is conjecture re: that the hole may have been envisioned as a two-shotter or a "half-par" hole (which would be unique as there are few long one-shotters that are thought of in this way)

2.  I also am under the impression that there is some level of provenance to the claim AM's female associate (I'm sorry I'm drawing a blank - Marion Hollins?) had a larger hand in the routing/design of that particular stretch of the course than is commonly understood.

As to Biarritz insinuations (which may be more germane to PM's original post) :

a. I began a thread last week that was polling and exchanging ideas and viewpoints on the Raynor Biarritzes at Yale and Fishers and a lot came out of it (for me at least).  One item became apparent and that is we don't know for sure what the original French Biarritz really looked like.  G. Bahto produced a painting of the scene, but it only captured a perpendicular perspective on the first portion of the shot from the left, nothing of the green complex.  Without sounding demeaning to my favorite architect, Seth Raynor, I say that Raynor never knew what the original Biarritz actually looked like.  He of course may have had access to other paintings and photos that are long veiled in the mist of history, plus the direct (and I'm sure) fulsome anecdotal descriptions from CBM.

b. After looking at Google Earth and some light research materials about the history of Biarritz's recreational environment, I believe I was able to ascertain the site of the original Biarritz and I posted the coordinates of what I believe the painter's perspective was for that picture as the last post on that thread. Though I gulp taking on even the second-hand (from ET) reports of what G. Bahto's conclusions about the original are, I must confess that if I have discovered the correct site it is NOT, I repeat, NOT a massive carry over the sea gorge.  It is no more than 60-80 yards...yes, the scenic (to the eye) scary (to the swing) water looms off the right and it is a craggy peninsula with isolated, limitless sea vistas for 150 degrees.  It seems breathtaking as many of the Raynor copies are, but even in a gutty/hickory age where an average man's good drive carried 160-180 yds, it is NOT the forced blast that Cypress seems to command    from the voluminous pictures and descriptions I have encountered, albeit without a scholar's depth or playing experience myself.

c.  How does this advance the discussion vis a vis Cypress and "shoulda, woulda, coulda?" In short, I believe that Raynor was always on the lookout for a Biarritz that had HIS idea of faithfulness to the original (which was either mistaken or eschewed for his own and his colleagues').  Net-net?  This is exactly the kind of land-form Raynor would say, "Biarritz" and go for it. 

I'm sorry if any of this is hopelessly misinformed.

Cheers

vk

[Chuck Brown]

Pat,

I don't believe so.

Having never played a true biarritz, I know that there are still many around the world of golf.

Being the case, I like how one of a kind the sixteenth hole at Cypress is.  Though perhaps an ideal spot for the ultimate biarritz, the hole would lose it's originailty if it was a template hole.

I consider the hole perfect.  Have you ever played a better par-3?  Have you ever played a better hole?

Besides the fact the site would allow for the ultimate biarritz, do you really believe it would make the hole better than it is now?

I don't believe having the sixteenth at Cypress as a template would improve the hole, even if it was the best biarritz in the world.

I gotta say I agree with Jordan although I haven't had the rare privilege of playing CPC.  I've played the Biarritz at Yale, and yes as far as I know the landform at CPC would have been an ideal place for Seth Raynor to attempt to template himself a Biarritz, and it is almost impossible to think that Raynor would have done anything there other than a Biarritz.  It is that ideally suited.  (I think a true Biarritz would have been a shorter hole, aimed more to the left from the present green positioning, right?)  But as Jordan says...

As for a Redan 16th at CPC, it would have been a reverse-Redan if anything, right?  I'm not sure how the essential "tilt" to the "tableland" would have been achieved.

[Sean Leary]

I think a severe green of any kind there would be too overwhelming.

[Lou_Duran]

Pat,

Being the case, I like how one of a kind the sixteenth hole at Cypress is.  Though perhaps an ideal spot for the ultimate biarritz, the hole would lose it's originailty if it was a template hole.

I consider the hole perfect.  Have you ever played a better par-3?  Have you ever played a better hole?

Besides the fact the site would allow for the ultimate biarritz, do you really believe it would make the hole better than it is now?

I don't believe having the sixteenth at Cypress as a template would improve the hole, even if it was the best biarritz in the world.

While I mostly disagree with Jordan's estimation of the hole, I too would not change a thing.  It is way too long and exposed to the environment to have a small canal perpendicular to the line of flight splitting the green (though it would make it more dicey for the "strategy" types who lay up to the left).  For many, getting the ball on dry land is a major achievement.  Having a 60'+ putt over a sizable swale would deflate the glorious experience of hitting the green with a good chance to two-putt for par.

I think that #16 is actually not a very good par 3 and hardly a "template" hole.  For most visitors it is a high risk all-or-nothing one shot hole- you either stay on the course somewhere on or near the green or you keep reteeing until you do so, or give up and take an illegal drop.  I don't know the membership, but I suspect that a good number can't make or don't even attempt the carry.  In effect, for them it plays more like a par 4 with still a not-so-easy forced carry.

In my opinion, four things make #16 famous: 1) the outstanding natural beauty of the setting, 2) its juxtapostion with the very "ideal" short #15, 3) the wonderful walk from #15 green to #16 tee with the anticipation of what awaits at the end, 4) how CPC chooses to characterize the edges of the course- i.e. no boundaries.  Line the cliffs in red or yellow, and the complexion of the hole changes considerably. 

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
Of course, it would have made the perfect Biarritz and it seems likely that the thought would have occurred to Raynor.

It would be hard to find a better site for one.

[George_Bahto]

should there be any question?

From  The Spirit of St. Andrews  -  The Lost manuscript of Alister MacKenzie

Sleeping Bear Press
121 South Main Street
PO Box 20
Chelsea, MI 48118

"The 16th at Cypress Point"

There is one exceptionally fine one-shot hole, namely, the 16th at Cypress Point, California, which so far no one has suggested should be altered. This hole, however, is of an entirely different character to that of which I have just written. Its excellence is not due to the tilt of the green, but to the amazingly beautiful and spectacular ocean hazard intervening between the tee and the green. To give honor where it is due, I must say that, except for minor details of construction, I was in no way responsible for the hole. It was largely due to the vision of Miss Marion Hollins (the founder of Cypress Point).  It was suggested to her by the late Seth Raynor that it was a pity the carry over the ocean was too long to enable a hole to be designed on this particular site.  Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. The photograph on page 52 givers a good idea of the character of the hole. There are three alternative routes, namely, the direct route over 200 hundred yards of ocean, an intermediate route over about 100 yards of ocean, and still a shorter route to the left.

A well-played shot to the lone Cypress tree with a nicely calculated slice gets the help of  the slope and runs up a slight swale and still have a good chance of a three.

I doubted if this hole could be considered ideal, because I feared that, compared with the other Cypress Point holes, there was not a sufficiently easy route for the weaker player. My mind was set at rest a few months ago.

Alister MacKenzie  1934

[David Stamm]

    Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. 

Do we know if AM's account here wasn't performed in his presence and not SR's? I think it's possible that Hollins reconted the remark of SR to AM and then the sentence recounts how Hollins showed AM, not SR.

[Bill_McBride]

    Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. 

Do we know if AM's account here wasn't performed in his presence and not SR's? I think it's possible that Hollins reconted the remark of SR to AM and then the sentence recounts how Hollins showed AM, not SR.

Hard to imagine the good doctor being modest! 

[David Stamm]

    Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. 

Do we know if AM's account here wasn't performed in his presence and not SR's? I think it's possible that Hollins reconted the remark of SR to AM and then the sentence recounts how Hollins showed AM, not SR.

Hard to imagine the good doctor being modest! 

That's my point, Bill. AM, I think, would not have used an idea of someone elses, especially Raynor. 

[Bill_McBride]

    Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. 

Do we know if AM's account here wasn't performed in his presence and not SR's? I think it's possible that Hollins reconted the remark of SR to AM and then the sentence recounts how Hollins showed AM, not SR.

Hard to imagine the good doctor being modest! 

That's my point, Bill. AM, I think, would not have used an idea of someone elses, especially Raynor. 

Without knowing anything at all about anything absolutely 100%, it has always been my understanding that it was Marion Hollins showing Mackenzie that the hole could play as a par 3.  We know so little about Raynor's work on site that it's hard to imagine that scene taking place with Raynor there.

[David Stamm]

    Miss Hollins said she did not think it was an  impossible carry. She then teed up a  ball and drove to the  middle of the suggested green. 

Do we know if AM's account here wasn't performed in his presence and not SR's? I think it's possible that Hollins reconted the remark of SR to AM and then the sentence recounts how Hollins showed AM, not SR.

Hard to imagine the good doctor being modest! 

That's my point, Bill. AM, I think, would not have used an idea of someone elses, especially Raynor. 

Without knowing anything at all about anything absolutely 100%, it has always been my understanding that it was Marion Hollins showing Mackenzie that the hole could play as a par 3.  We know so little about Raynor's work on site that it's hard to imagine that scene taking place with Raynor there.

That is what I took from the passage as well.

[Jed Rammell]

Pat,

Being the case, I like how one of a kind the sixteenth hole at Cypress is.  Though perhaps an ideal spot for the ultimate biarritz, the hole would lose it's originailty if it was a template hole.

I consider the hole perfect.  Have you ever played a better par-3?  Have you ever played a better hole?

Besides the fact the site would allow for the ultimate biarritz, do you really believe it would make the hole better than it is now?

I don't believe having the sixteenth at Cypress as a template would improve the hole, even if it was the best biarritz in the world.

While I mostly disagree with Jordan's estimation of the hole, I too would not change a thing.  It is way too long and exposed to the environment to have a small canal perpendicular to the line of flight splitting the green (though it would make it more dicey for the "strategy" types who lay up to the left).  For many, getting the ball on dry land is a major achievement.  Having a 60'+ putt over a sizable swale would deflate the glorious experience of hitting the green with a good chance to two-putt for par.

I think that #16 is actually not a very good par 3 and hardly a "template" hole.  For most visitors it is a high risk all-or-nothing one shot hole- you either stay on the course somewhere on or near the green or you keep reteeing until you do so, or give up and take an illegal drop.  I don't know the membership, but I suspect that a good number can't make or don't even attempt the carry.  In effect, for them it plays more like a par 4 with still a not-so-easy forced carry.

In my opinion, four things make #16 famous: 1) the outstanding natural beauty of the setting, 2) its juxtapostion with the very "ideal" short #15, 3) the wonderful walk from #15 green to #16 tee with the anticipation of what awaits at the end, 4) how CPC chooses to characterize the edges of the course- i.e. no boundaries.  Line the cliffs in red or yellow, and the complexion of the hole changes considerably. 

I think I agree (though I've only played Cypress in my dreams). Many call this the finest golf hole in the world, but isn't it just an all or nothing manhood measuring contest? #10 at Riveria or #18 at Pebble surely offer more strategic elements, and in my mind are much better candidates as the finest hole in golf (never played them either). 

[George_Bahto]

I qouted exactly what was in the Mackenzie book - his "lost manuscript" that Sleeping Bear published .... page 15-something or other

from there on you can surmise whatever you'd like

[Adam Clayman]

Jed, Your assumption is incorrect. Don't believe me, believe the good doctor in the passage posted above by George Bahto.

It is not an all or nothing question.

I was fortunate to play in a significant competition on my one and only play, there. Circumstances outside of my control made it prudent to NOT play it all or nothing. Instead, to aim slightly left of the green to ensure a safe ball. You can believe I was not happy having to play safe, but, since it was a team comp. my interests were not the dominate ones at stake. Yes, I was bitching, internally, and yes I was very tempted to throw caution to the wind, but in the end, I did the right thing, hit slightly left (Almost pin high) and we ended up winning the championship.

BTW, The caddies went out one day and measured the actual carry with a fishing line. 197 yards to carry.

David, Bill, I don't see it as that clear cut. If, as the doctor writes, Miss Hollins was the founder of CPC, and she had SR out to see the raw site, she could've easily proved it to him there and then.

The doctor's account seems to recall the incident without interjecting he was a witness to it.

[Jordan Wall]

Pat,

Being the case, I like how one of a kind the sixteenth hole at Cypress is.  Though perhaps an ideal spot for the ultimate biarritz, the hole would lose it's originailty if it was a template hole.

I consider the hole perfect.  Have you ever played a better par-3?  Have you ever played a better hole?

Besides the fact the site would allow for the ultimate biarritz, do you really believe it would make the hole better than it is now?

I don't believe having the sixteenth at Cypress as a template would improve the hole, even if it was the best biarritz in the world.

While I mostly disagree with Jordan's estimation of the hole, I too would not change a thing.  It is way too long and exposed to the environment to have a small canal perpendicular to the line of flight splitting the green (though it would make it more dicey for the "strategy" types who lay up to the left).  For many, getting the ball on dry land is a major achievement.  Having a 60'+ putt over a sizable swale would deflate the glorious experience of hitting the green with a good chance to two-putt for par.

I think that #16 is actually not a very good par 3 and hardly a "template" hole.  For most visitors it is a high risk all-or-nothing one shot hole- you either stay on the course somewhere on or near the green or you keep reteeing until you do so, or give up and take an illegal drop.  I don't know the membership, but I suspect that a good number can't make or don't even attempt the carry.  In effect, for them it plays more like a par 4 with still a not-so-easy forced carry.

In my opinion, four things make #16 famous: 1) the outstanding natural beauty of the setting, 2) its juxtapostion with the very "ideal" short #15, 3) the wonderful walk from #15 green to #16 tee with the anticipation of what awaits at the end, 4) how CPC chooses to characterize the edges of the course- i.e. no boundaries.  Line the cliffs in red or yellow, and the complexion of the hole changes considerably. 

I think I agree (though I've only played Cypress in my dreams). Many call this the finest golf hole in the world, but isn't it just an all or nothing manhood measuring contest? #10 at Riveria or #18 at Pebble surely offer more strategic elements, and in my mind are much better candidates as the finest hole in golf (never played them either). 

Jed,

Having played all the holes you mention, the sixteenth at Cypress is in equal terms with regards to strategic merit as the tenth at Riviera and the eighteenth at Pebble.

The difference between those holes is the length and par of each, which in this case does make a difference.  As a par-3, the sixteenth at Cypress has one primary shot, the tee shot, with which shines the strategic merit.

In this shot, one can choose to be a hero by going for the green, and being that one is playing Cypress and is probably not likely to get that chance many times, that is the shot that most will try.  However, one can also choose to lay up.  The closer one lays up the cliff, the better the angle to green, and usually the shorter the second shot.

The only shot that provides the same excitement from the other holes you mention is the tee shot at the tenth at Riviera, where many options abound.  The only difference is, there is not the same heroic nature in going for the green at Riviera as there is at Cypress, because the penalty if you do not make it far less severe.  Remember, if you miss at Cypress, it's three from the tee.

Pebble's eighteenth is a wonderful hole as well and provides its own strategic merit.  Included in this is a cape like tee shot over the ocean, and a second shot that requires decisive thinking for where to lay up or perhaps go for the green.  The closer to the ocean on the second shot, the better the angle to the green, and naturally, the closer the tee shot to the ocean, the better angle to go for the green in two.  The tee shot also provides more of a heroic nature than that of Riviera because again, if you duck it into the ocean, it's three from the tee.

Riviera's gets it's strength from it's abundance of options off the tee, and the wonderfully unique green that alters plays from the tee and the approach.

The main difference I see between these three holes, however, is the fact that the sixteenth at Cypress plays mind games with the players.  When someone plays Cypress for the first time, the shot they think about the entire round is that tee shot on sixteen.  This is not the case with the tenth at Riviera or the eighteenth at Pebble, or at least not as much so at the sixteenth at Cypress.

In any case, all three are great holes and are surely among the best in the world.

To get back to Pat's question, even if the sexteenth at Cypress was a biarritz, it would just be too hard at 230+ yards.  

And in thinking, if the hole was a biarritz and ultimately the green had been moved left and not on the bluff to which it currently plays, how might that have adversey affected the seventeenth hole?

I don't believe there to be a better way to design the sixteenth and seventeenth holes.  How can you argue with the games strongest par-3?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

When you ask if the 16th at CPC should've been a biarritz hole I'm not too sure what you have in mind. What would be different about it? Are you thinking of a green (or fairway then green) that is really long with a big swale in it.

If so, that seems to be one of the mysterious and heretofore unanswered questions about the original Biarrtiz hole in France. I don't know that anyone has ever been sure whether that green did have some really big swale in it which seems to be a centerpiece for all Macdonald/Raynor and Raynor biarritzes and biarritzes by others.

On the other hand the only Biarritzes I know of that have that carry across water or something very similar to it are Yale and Fishers Island, and The Creek.

I have always thought the massive swale in Biarritz greens was an idea Macdonald perhaps got from NB's #16.

Don't forget, C.B. always did say he did not always use whole hole copies with what he did, sometimes prefering to just use some individual feature from somewhere on another hole somewhere else.

[Adam Clayman]

Don't forget the wind's affect. It determines one's strategy decision as well as club selection. The green site is large enough that it can create as much as a three club difference, independent of the wind.

The Biarittz idea is horrible. Better saved for ground with less of it's own character. At CPC's 16th, that is not the case.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jordan,
It would be a hard hole, no doubt, but the pleasure of watching the disappearing/reappearing ball would be tremendous.
Yale's carry from the tips is 180+- (don't quote me). Cypress' is 200?

  

[David Stamm]

 
David, Bill, I don't see it as that clear cut. If, as the doctor writes, Miss Hollins was the founder of CPC, and she had SR out to see the raw site, she could've easily proved it to him there and then.

The doctor's account seems to recall the incident without interjecting he was a witness to it.

I understand, Adam. But we don't know what SR had planned, if he even did. If in fact Hollins had hit the shot in front of Raynor, we don't know if he had been persuaded because there is no plan (as of yet) that has turned up and we don't know what Raynor had to say about the site. We don't know if he even would've used the site at all, yet alone for a heroic par 3. Had Raynor done a par 3 of that length and difficulty before? It would seem out of character for him, and I agree w/ Jordan, it would've been even more difficult by using the site as a Biarritz template complete with the swale. I think there is a reason AM chose to design the most benign green on the course. Anything more undulating/severe would've made it borderline impossible.


If Raynor had been convinced of 16, if he had drawn up plans and the course was pretty much designed already before his death, why bring AM in at all? Could Hollins and others utilized those plans and built the course without searching out AM? AM had not yet entered super stardom yet and Raynor was a known name. Was not the MPCC Dunes a Raynor design and then built after his death? 

[Bob_Huntley]

I think a Biarritz on the 16th at Cypress is like putting a mustache on the Mona Lisa.

Bob

[Jordan Wall]

Jordan,
It would be a hard hole, no doubt, but the pleasure of watching the disappearing/reappearing ball would be tremendous.
Yale's carry from the tips is 180+- (don't quote me). Cypress' is 200?

  

From Ran's review: "The reality is only slightly more on a human scale with tee perched high on an embankment sixty feet above Griest Pond.

The sixteenth at Cypress has almost no elevation change.  It probably plays at least three clubs longer than Yale's 9th, and not to mentione it is completely exposed to the always strong ocean breeze.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Patrick,

If you set out to confuse us about what exactly is a "Biarritz" hole, you seem to have succeeded.  I note that some commentators think the template is a heroic hole over a chasm, and some think it's a par 3 with a big swale in the green.  I couldn't imagine that you would be serious about suggesting a big swale in the green at Cypress #16, that's why I didn't bother to dismiss that suggestion as Adam did.  Please have pity on us lesser intellects and clear up your thinking as Tom Paul suggests.

Lou Duran, you said

"I think that #16 is actually not a very good par 3 ...  In effect...it plays more like a par 4 with still a not-so-easy forced carry."

Why in the world would you evaluate a hole like this with this discussion of its par on the scorecard?  Would you also say that the Road Hole is a bad par 4 because most gofers can't reach it in two, or because they have to play away from the bunker because of their mortal fear of it, or because once in the bunker they have to do the equivalent of re-teeing on #16, hitting the bunker shot over and over again until they get it right? 

What golfer as he steps up to the 16th tee at Cypress cares a whit about par?  I say if he executes the heroic shot and makes a 1, 2, 3, or 4, he will count himself lucky.  {On my own one try on a not-too-windy day, I hit a 5-wood onto the rocks and watched with glee as it ricocheted up onto the green, then I 3-putted.  I was thrilled.}

The hole is great because of all the things you and Jordan and Adam have identified.  Neither this nor any other hole worth studying should be measured for greatness against what we call it on the scorecard.

[TEPaul]

"I think a Biarritz on the 16th at Cypress is like putting a mustache on the Mona Lisa."


BobH:

When in Paris Patrick Mucci actually tried to put a mustache on the Mona Lisa and consequently spent two weeks in Paris rather than one week.

[TEPaul]

"Did Raynor's design have a Biarritz on that site ?"



Actually, Patrick, it may not be long now before I can answer that question for you. I believe I am closing in on perhaps the most elusive and mysterious piece of architectural history out there. I have a lead that the design plan may've also had a "Lion's Mouth" green.

Did you know that Tommy Birdsong's Fernandina Beach Municipal once had a "North Florida Spotted Leopard's Mouth" green on it?

[Jed Rammell]

Patrick,

If you set out to confuse us about what exactly is a "Biarritz" hole, you seem to have succeeded.  I note that some commentators think the template is a heroic hole over a chasm, and some think it's a par 3 with a big swale in the green.  I couldn't imagine that you would be serious about suggesting a big swale in the green at Cypress #16, that's why I didn't bother to dismiss that suggestion as Adam did.  Please have pity on us lesser intellects and clear up your thinking as Tom Paul suggests.

Lou Duran, you said

"I think that #16 is actually not a very good par 3 ...  In effect...it plays more like a par 4 with still a not-so-easy forced carry."

Why in the world would you evaluate a hole like this with this discussion of its par on the scorecard?  Would you also say that the Road Hole is a bad par 4 because most gofers can't reach it in two, or because they have to play away from the bunker because of their mortal fear of it, or because once in the bunker they have to do the equivalent of re-teeing on #16, hitting the bunker shot over and over again until they get it right? 

What golfer as he steps up to the 16th tee at Cypress cares a whit about par?  I say if he executes the heroic shot and makes a 1, 2, 3, or 4, he will count himself lucky.  {On my own one try on a not-too-windy day, I hit a 5-wood onto the rocks and watched with glee as it ricocheted up onto the green, then I 3-putted.  I was thrilled.}

The hole is great because of all the things you and Jordan and Adam have identified.  Neither this nor any other hole worth studying should be measured for greatness against what we call it on the scorecard.

Eric, I agree that you can't evaluate the hole based on par, but if you evaluate it based on strategy, it still comes up short. You have two options; be a man, or be a Moriarty. At Riviera #10, you can hit mid iron to the fat of the fiarway, hit driver into the front bunker, hit driver left of the green, hit 3 wood left of the green, hit driver over the green, etc.

Regardless, if you told me I could pick one hole to play one time in my life, I'd pick Cypress #16. Maybe that is the criteria to base greatness on, strategy be damned.

[Adam Clayman]

I think there is a reason AM chose to design the most benign green on the course. Anything more undulating/severe would've made it borderline impossible.
  

My speculated reason for what you are calling the most benign green was that he didn't want to detract from the unbelievable natural beauty.

Also, that rock outcrop is not like the dunes land of the 8th, 9th, 12th and 13th holes. An undulating green would feel out of place. And that's why a Biarittz would be out of place and a horrible aesthetic.

P.s. I might like to argue about the most benign green. After my one time, I recall at least one other. (Maybe the 10th?) But, again, it's getting on in years now, January 6th 2000. The day Spyglass Hill first won the cup.  

[Jordan Wall]

I think there is a reason AM chose to design the most benign green on the course. Anything more undulating/severe would've made it borderline impossible.
  

P.s. I might like to argue about the most benign green. After my one time, I recall at least one other. (Maybe the 10th?) But, again, it's getting on in years now, January 6th 2000. The day Spyglass Hill first won the cup.  

Adam,

The sixteenth green is easily the most benign on the course.

Cheers,
Jordan

[Eric_Terhorst]

At Riviera #10, you can hit mid iron to the fat of the fiarway, hit driver into the front bunker, hit driver left of the green, hit 3 wood left of the green, hit driver over the green, etc.

As far as I can tell, you have now diminished two great holes by describing Riviera's 10th as a binary play--1) lay-up or 2) play near/on the green.  Get up on the wrong side today?

[Mike Benham]

Adam,

The sixteenth green is easily the most benign on the course.

Cheers,
Jordan

It is of my opinion that the 6th green is relatively benign (less tilt) but less so then 16 ...

[Jed Rammell]

At Riviera #10, you can hit mid iron to the fat of the fiarway, hit driver into the front bunker, hit driver left of the green, hit 3 wood left of the green, hit driver over the green, etc.

As far as I can tell, you have now diminished two great holes by describing Riviera's 10th as a binary play--1) lay-up or 2) play near/on the green.  Get up on the wrong side today?

No, but I must not have explained myself well enough. In my eyes, Cypress #16 is a binary play, but Riviera #10 has a ton of options off the tee, and the flag location dictates a multiple number of options off the tee, and when playing the approach. This is an outside view, as I've never played either hole.

[Jordan Wall]

Adam,

The sixteenth green is easily the most benign on the course.

Cheers,
Jordan

It is of my opinion that the 6th green is relatively benign (less tilt) but less so then 16 ...

Mike,

While the sixth does not have a lot of slope or contour, it is much harder to read than the sixteenth.  The green itself is almost flat, which is actually tough because it looks as if it slopes a good deal back to front.

I have seen a good amount of visitors blow a putt past going toward the back of the green, and leave a putt far short going toward the front of the green.

It is probably about as flat as the sixteenth, just much harder to read, in my opinion.  For that reason I consider the sixteenth more benign.

Cheers,
Jordan