[paul cowley]

Some measure up, but I feel things are changing.

Technology and nostalgia combine to erode their positions compared to many of the New.

Pebble and Augusta aren't quite what they used to be.....as golf courses anyway.

[Mac Plumart]

Paul...

I've never played either of them, so I can't speak to them as golf courses specifically.

But I can say that I feel more compelled to go to the courses in Great Britian and Ireland and Bandon Dunes ahead of Pebble. 

You are touching on something that I find very interesting to consider...in 20, 50, 100 years what will people be saying about the courses we currently have in the Top 100?  There is a list on this site that lists the Top 100 from the 1930's (?).  It is neat to see how that list has changed and or stayed the same.  But more interesting is WHY has it changed or stayed the same.  Obviously, new courses have moved in...but some are still on there and for sure most of the courses still exist.

Cool stuff to think about.

[Ronald Montesano]

Paul,

Do you have the time to elaborate?  Technology is a tactile, tangible thing while nostalgia is a notion, a brume.  The plastic surgeries of Augusta National (aimed at defending against technology) are well documented, while the sole alteration of similar consequence was this:  http://www.pebblebeach.com/page.asp?id=964

How, in your opinion, has technology eroded Pebble's position?  How has the power of nostalgia strengthened or weakened to do the same?  From my perspective, it is the same course that Neville and Grant designed decades ago.  The same cannot be said of Augusta.

[Jud_T]

Mac,

Make the obligitory trip to Pebble, but you will want to go back to Bandon over and over again...G, B & I is the money of course, but for value and jet lag, Bandon simply cannot be beat.  After Old Mac opens, it will probably be the best one stop shopping in golf...

[Dale Jackson]

Technology and nostalgia combine to erode their positions compared to many of the New.

Pebble and Augusta aren't quite what they used to be.....as golf courses anyway.

It would seem to me that the very best are less affected technology, they exhibit the timeless qualities and features that so many of us espouse on this site.  To be sure some lengthening may be required and some adjustment of fairway bunkering, but this is probably minimal compared to other lesser courses.  

And we all fall into the trap of gauging greatness against the standards of the very best male professional and amateur players, rather than how well courses challenge and entertain the widest range of players.  Indeed, in my opinion, a course cannot be called "great", (an arbitrary term to be sure) unless it is able to challenge and entertain all levels of players, not just the very best.

I am not sure how you are referring to nostalgia, I would have thought nostalgia would enhance the reputation of the older courses.

As to the two courses you mention, they would seem quite different beasts.  While never having played AN, I, like so many others, feel we know it form television.  AN's reputation has generally suffered (one magazine's rankings to the contrary) but that surely is the result of the changes made over the last 10 years to "modernize" it, with the result being strategic options have been eliminated and it is now a more typical tournament course.

I have played PB, and it was the singularly most disappointing experience I have had playing a new course.  Not to say it is not a very good  course, and the 8th would probably be my favourite hole ever played, however, the supporting cast to the 5 or 6 truly great holes just do not live up to the lofty reputation of the course.

I would say in the case of AN, poorly planned and implemented changes have contributed to any erosion of esteem, and in the case of PB, that reputation was never deserved.

[Jud_T]

Dale,

Very astute comments for a guy with only 191 posts.  Where were you when I suggested that Pebble was perhaps slightly overrated and got vilified for it?   

[Tim Bert]

Dale

have you only played Pebble once?  I have only Ayer it three times myself, but the course grew on me each time.  I can't see how it is among the 5 or even 10 greatest courses on Earth but it is certainly a wonderful golf course and a pleasure to play. The "weaker" holes tha so man refer to are the ones that probably grew the most on me with the 2nd and 3rd play.

I am not in the "8 is the greatest hole in the world" camp, but I do really enjoy the course as a whole.

Your opinion sounds like one of someone that was underwhelmed the first time and neve tried again - understandable given the extreme fee they charge to play the course - but as one who went through the same thought process and then returned for an encore the following year I thought I would chime in with a differing view.

If you have played multiple times, then I stand corrected.     

[Ronald Montesano]

Just curious, Jud and Dale.  How many combined playings of Pebble do you have?  Dale appears to have one and Jud?  You know why I ask...familiarity breeds contempt (oh wait, that's not the quote I was looking for.)  I played The Old Course at St. Andrews once and wouldn't dream of hacking it up nor praising it overly so in conversation.  That said, I believe I had a few negative things to say about Pebble (a course I have never played), at which point Bob Huntley or David Stamm (maybe both) gave me the benefit of their knowledge, experience and wisdom.

We know Augusta from television?  No, we do not.  It cannot show the hills, the elevation changes, the severity of the greens.  Television can do no such thing for any course, not even Pebble Beach!  I have not set foot on the Georgia property, either, but friends who have attended practice rounds have told me that they simply ran out of breath after walking the course.

[Jud_T]

Ronald,

I only played it once, and certainly intend to get back there some day.  It's true that I didn't fully appreciate TOC on my first trip around.  It just seemed at Pebble that there were a handful of the most scenic holes in the world, and too many pedestrian holes to be considered a top 10 course in the world.  I'm not saying it's a dogtrack by any means..   I also think that it may be another of those courses that is quite challenging from the tips for the best players, but not as much fun for the rest of us.  I also put less emphasis on scenery than some...

[Tim Nugent]

Paul, greetings and Happy New Year.

Let's look at it this way.  Could it be that it is the modifications made to some of those old courses (like the 2 you mention) in the name of 'protecting them' from the 1/10 of 1% have lessened the enjoyability for the rest of us?  And the courses that have, fortunately, elected to NOT go down that road (CP, PV, by me - Shore Acres, Chicago GC)  are the ones that are still revered?  Look at the courses we played in Scotland. Although some have been lengthened due to the Open, I don't think many messed with the internals of the hole, just added a back tee and left the course the same for the rest of us.  And we all had a ball.  And the ones that guys seemed to like the best were Prestwick and North Berwick, were a couple of the shortest.

When it comes to PB, I think the biggest change is that the distance and accurancy of medal woods have taken alot from the course.
Instead of trying to hit those itty bitty greens with a long iron, now they can be had with short irons.  And the fear factor of slicing a Wood wood with the right side being death on most holes, is gone.

[Ronald Montesano]

Tim,

Wouldn't the solution, then, be to do something with the drive zones at Pebble?

[Dale Jackson]

Dale,

Very astute comments for a guy with only 191 posts.  Where were you when I suggested that Pebble was perhaps slightly overrated and got vilified for it?   

Out in the GCA wilderness, I suppose!  Actually, studying GCA but not active on this group - although lurking.  As for the number of posts, I hope there is not necessarily a correlation between # and quality. 

Just curious, Jud and Dale.  How many combined playings of Pebble do you have?  Dale appears to have one and Jud?  You know why I ask...familiarity breeds contempt (oh wait, that's not the quote I was looking for.)  I played The Old Course at St. Andrews once and wouldn't dream of hacking it up nor praising it overly so in conversation.  That said, I believe I had a few negative things to say about Pebble (a course I have never played), at which point Bob Huntley or David Stamm (maybe both) gave me the benefit of their knowledge, experience and wisdom.

We know Augusta from television?  No, we do not.  It cannot show the hills, the elevation changes, the severity of the greens.  Television can do no such thing for any course, not even Pebble Beach!  I have not set foot on the Georgia property, either, but friends who have attended practice rounds have told me that they simply ran out of breath after walking the course.

PB? Yes, just the one play.  But I will say that I never play one of the best known courses without finding out all I can about it, including reading and viewing what is on this website before I play.  I knew the descriptions of all 18 holes before I played and have thought long and hard about PB since then (about 3 years).  I freely admit additional rounds will bring more knowledge.  But I do not think my basic opinion will change.  That is, it is viewed by most, if not all rankings to be top 5, and many highly respected players and observers also have it that high.  I do not think I would ever be in that camp.  And to stress what I originally wrote, I do not think it is anything less than a very, very good course, I just do not see it as being top 5 or 10.

As for TOC, before I played there the first time, I had read and studied as much as I could about the course, and it exceeded my expectations.  I have played there about 6 or 8 times and like it more each time I play.

Re AN, I understand TV does not do the elevation changes justice, nor the contours of the greens.  My point though, is that the last 10 years have taken a radical course architecture and turned it more towards a modern tournament standard - narrowed landing areas, 500 yard plus Par 4s, and reduced strategic options.  Regardless of what television does to the appearance of the course, I do not think many would argue what has happened there in the last 10 years.  Some might like the changes, some not (and I freely admit to being in that camp), but the changes have happened.

Although I have not been to AN, I have 3 or 4 very knowledgeable friends who have attended several Masters each and 3 (I think) who have played it.  I find their views consistent with mine.

I would note that almost all commentary about AN, including mine, is based on repeated watchings of one tournament held the same week each year.  The true gauge should be knowledge of the course during its whole playing season, and how it plays for all levels of golfers, expert to dub.  Watching it for one week certainly does not do that.

[paul cowley]

Nostalgia can mask deficiencies....and new technology can kill.

I've played Pebble 100's of times in the 70's having been a greenkeeper there.

Not the same, nor as good.

But maybe I'm just being nostalgic.

[Tim Nugent]

So Paul, what, in your opinion is the main factor that made the '70's playing experience better?  Since you can find a tee that equates to the game of a young Paul C, is it the changes in the course or the equipt?  Does my thesis pertaining to playing with percimmons and blades vs Medals and perimeter weighted caviety backs  as they relate to the small greens and wind, hold any water ?

Ron, what more would you want to do.  If you narrowed them up and got the rough to be thick and long to produce flyiers, you would kill the resort player plus you would be doing what they have crucified AN for doing - changing the course.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Paul,
Somehow your premise doesn't match the 'lists'. There are only two courses that make it into the realm of the anointed, and they are Sand Hills at #8 and Pacific Dunes at #10 on Golf Magazine's Top 100 list. Nothing new cracks the top 10 list in Golf Digest's view.

I do agree that newer courses are always going to make their way onto these ratings lists, supplanting the older courses that either fail to 'modernize' themselves, or who just say 'no' to it because they are happy with their status quo, or that weren't 'good' enough to remain on the list in the face of what surely is the best competitors they've come up against in the last 70 years.

Happy New Year

[Ronald Montesano]

I'm not thinking of narrowing and adding rough.  What I am thinking about is repositioning bunkers, enhancing already-present  fairway slopes and adding declivities in and along fairways.  Concede the distance benefit and the reduced-misses benefit of technology, but challenge it with slightly off-level lies.  Add a downhill, an uphill, a sidehill on the holes where the short iron now brings the player into the green.

[Tim Nugent]

Ronald, My God Man, do you realize the enormity of that?  You're falling into the tournement trap.  Wholesale changes to compensate for how a miniscule minority play.  You would essentially be remaking 50% of the course (do you really rhink PB would lose that much revenue?), and for what? IMHO the fairway were never primary or even secondary defense of PB.  It's all about the greens and controlling you ball when it's in the air.

Personally, I would give it higher marks if the went back to the pre-war shaggy. raggy bunkers and stopped messing with the course.  Hell the pro tee for #2 is now all the way back to the landing area on #1.  At some point you just have to say - it is what it is - low score wins.  The problem is with Medal play they try to keep scores about the same year in, year out.  If Match play was used, it wouldn't matter how low the winner went, no ones keeping score.

[Matt_Ward]

Dale:

Read your views on PB -- a few questions for you.

Was the course playing especially slow -- with tee shots hitting and nearly stopping -- were the greens spongy and more about making shoulder-turns to get the ball to the hole ?

PB needs to be played when it's dry and fast -- then all the architectural elements really come to the surface.

Agree with a few of the others -- let PB play that way and low score -- whatever it is or however low it may be -- wins.

Dale, in a one time play and with slow plodding turf conditions -- Pebble can be seen as overrated.

I have played it enough to know a bit better -- especially when turf conditions are firmer and when those small greens are tough to hit -- especially when any wind of measurable intensity is blowing.

ANGC, on the other hand, has lived very well with a bloated reputation that has failed to really mark the course down since Hootie and the Gang instituted the changes they brought forward -- the second cut, the added trees, the narrowing of fairways and the inane extension of tee lengths.

Dale, I would not place PB among my personal top ten courses in the USA for some of the reasons you mentioned -- there are a number of so-so holes in the mix. But overall, PB does have its moments on the high side which more than make up for any possible deficiencies.


Ron M:

Just a quick comment -- how a course plays for a "dub" is really immaterial to me. Dubs need to head to the range and learn to hit the ball to some degree because architecture should try to accomodate those who can at least advance the ball to some degree. People hitting grounders more often than not and spraying so far afield that they can reach the east-west borders of Kansas are not really worth considering in my mind.

[Dale Jackson]

Dale:

Read your views on PB -- a few questions for you.

Was the course playing especially slow -- with tee shots hitting and nearly stopping -- were the greens spongy and more about making shoulder-turns to get the ball to the hole ?

PB needs to be played when it's dry and fast -- then all the architectural elements really come to the surface.

Agree with a few of the others -- let PB play that way and low score -- whatever it is or however low it may be -- wins.

Dale, in a one time play and with slow plodding turf conditions -- Pebble can be seen as overrated.

I have played it enough to know a bit better -- especially when turf conditions are firmer and when those small greens are tough to hit -- especially when any wind of measurable intensity is blowing.

ANGC, on the other hand, has lived very well with a bloated reputation that has failed to really mark the course down since Hootie and the Gang instituted the changes they brought forward -- the second cut, the added trees, the narrowing of fairways and the inane extension of tee lengths.

Dale, I would not place PB among my personal top ten courses in the USA for some of the reasons you mentioned -- there are a number of so-so holes in the mix. But overall, PB does have its moments on the high side which more than make up for any possible deficiencies.
 

Matt, I was actually pleasantly surprised by the conditions and conditioning.  Based on many reports I had read, I expected everything to be a little spotty, but, to the contrary, I thought it was in very good shape.  The greens especially impressed me.  I played in early August and we were the first group off in the morning (they hold a time before the public plays for raters - yes, I am one of those dreaded types!).  It was a little hazy early on and then turned into a gorgeous, sunny day.  I would not call the conditions F&F but they were good.

And Matt, I agree with your assessment, it is a really good course, not just in my top 5 or 10.  The really good holes are REALLY GOOD but my favourite courses have, to my mind, REALLY GOOD holes and good holes, not fair holes like some at PB.

[Matt_Ward]

Dale:

Thanks.

PB can only be really seen when it's firm and fast. The slopes and small nature of the greens really come to the surface when dry conditions prevail.

I concur with you -- I would not have PB in my personal top 10 -- more of a top 20 layout but make no mistake about it -- when the wind freshens there and the conditions become hard and dry -- the nature of the shots played and required is a high mark indeed.

Help me out with the so-so holes you see at PB.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()